952d affi" } COMMITTEE PRINT
WEATHER MODIFICATION:
PROGRAMS, PROBLEMS, POLICY, AND
POTENTIAL
Prepared at the Keqtiest of
Hon. Howard W. Cannon, Chairman
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
r
95S Congress I COMMITTEE PRINT
2d Session J
WEATHER MODIFICATION:
PROGRAMS, PROBLEMS, POLICY, AND
POTENTIAL
Prepared at the Request of
Hox. Howard W. Cannon, Chairman
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
MAY 1978
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
U.S. government printing office
34-857 WASHINGTON : 1978
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
HOWARD W. CANNON, Nevada, Chairman
WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Washington
RUSSELL B. LONG, Louisiana
ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
ADLAI E. STEVENSON, Illinois
WENDELL H. FORD, Kentucky
JOHN A. DURKIN, New Hampshire
EDWARD ZORINSKY, Nebraska
DONALD W. RIEGLE, Jr., Michigan
Aubrey L. Sarvis, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Edwin K. Hall, General Counsel
Malcolm M. B. Sterrett, Minority Staff Director
JAMES B. PEARSON, Kansas
ROBERT P. GRIFFIN, Michigan
TED STEVENS, Alaska
BARRY GOLDWATER, Arizona
BOB PACKWOOD, Oregon
HARRISON H. SCHMITT, New Mexico
JOHN C. DANFORTH, Missouri
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
November 15, 1978.
To the members of the Committee on Commerce. Science, and
Transportation, U.S. Senate:
I am pleased to transmit herewith for your information and use the
following report on "Weather Modification: Programs, Problems,
Policy, and Potential."
The report was prepared at my request by the Congressional Re-
search Service under the direction of Dr. Robert Morrison, Specialist
in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research Division. We thank Dr.
Morrison and the others involved in the study for their extremely
thorough and scholarly report. Substantial material on almost all
areas of weather modification are included and the report will provide
the committee with an excellent reference source for future delibera-
tions on the subject.
The completion of the report is particularly timely due to the up-
coming recommendations expected from the Weather Modification
Advisory Board and the Department of Commerce (as directed by
Public Law 94-490) on the future Federal role in weather
modification.
James B. Pearson,
Ranking minority member.
(in)
LETTER REQUESTING STUDY
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, D.C., July 30, 1976.
Dr. Norman A. Beckman,
Acting Director, Congressional Research Service,
Library of Congress, W ashington, D.C.
Dear Dr. Beckman: Weather modification, although a relatively
young science, has over the years stimulated great interest within the
scientific, commercial, governmental, and agricultural communities.
Such responses are readily understandable. Weather-related disasters
and hazards affect virtually all Americans and annually cause untold
human suffering and loss of life and result in billions of dollars of eco-
nomic loss to crops and other property. While weather modification
projects have been operational for nearly 25 years and have been
shown to have significant potential for preventing, diverting, moderat-
ing, or ameliorating the adverse effects of such weather related disas-
ters and hazards, I am greatly concerned regarding the lack of a
coordinated Federal weather modification policy and a coordinated
and comprehensive program for weather modification research and
development. This fact is all the more disturbing in view of the mani-
fest needs, and benefits, social and economic, that can be associated with
weather modification activities. These deficiencies in our Federal orga-
nizational structure have resulted in a less than optimal return on our
investments in weather modification activities and a failure, with few
exceptions, to recognize that much additional research and develop-
ment needs to be carried out before weather modification becomes a
truly operational tool.
Reports and studies conducted by such diverse organizations as the
National Academy of Sciences, the National Advisory Committee on
Oceans and Atmosphere, the General Accounting Office, and the
Domestic Council have highlighted the lack of a comprehensive Federal
weather modification policy and research and development program.
Hearings that I chaired in February of this year reinforced my con-
cerns regarding the wisdom of our continued failure to implement a
national policy on this very important issue.
I am therefore requesting the Congressional Research Service to
prepare a comprehensive report on weather modification. This report
should include a review of the history and existing status of weather
modification knowledge and technology; the legislative history of
existing and proposed domestic legislation concerning weather mod-
ification; socio-economic and legal problems presented by weather
modification activities; a review and analysis of the existing local,
State, Federal, and international weather modification organizational
(V)
VI
structure: international implications of weather modification activi-
ties: and a review and discussion of alternative U.S. and international
weather modification policies and research and development programs.
If you have any questions with respect to this request, please contact
Mr. Gerry J. Kovach, Minority Staff Counsel of the Senate Commerce
Committee. He has discussed this study with Mr. Robert E. Morrison
and Mr. John Justus of the Science Policy Division, Congressional
Research Service.
Very truly yours,
James B. Pearsox,
U.S. Senator.
LETTER OF SUBMITTAL
The Library of Congress,
congressional research service,
Washington, D.C., June 19, 1978.
Hon. James B. Pearson,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
Dear Senator Pearson: The enclosed report, entitled "Weather
Modification: Programs, Problems, Policy, and Potential," has been
prepared by the Congressional Research Service in response to your
request.
The study reviews the history, technology, activities, and a number
of special aspects of the field of weather modification. Activities
discussed are those of the Federal, State, and local governments, of
private organizations, and of foreign nations. Consideration is given
to international, legal, economic, and ecological aspects. There are
also an introductory chapter which includes a summary of issues, a
chapter discussing inadvertent weather and climate modification, and
a chapter summarizing recommendations from major Federal policy
studies.
The study has been coordinated by Dr. Robert E. Morrison, Special-
ist in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research Division, who also
prepared chapters 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, and 9 as well as the Summary and
Conclusions. Mr. John R. Justus, Analyst in Earth Sciences, and
Dr. James E. Mielke, Analyst in Marine and Earth Sciences, both
of the Science Policy Research Division, contributed chapters 4 and
6, respectively. Chapter 10 was prepared by Mrs. Lois B. McHugh,
Foreign Affairs Analyst, Foreign Affairs and National Defense Di-
vision. Chapter 11 was written jointly by Mrs. Nancy Lee Jones,
Legislative Attorney, and Mr. Daniel Hill Zaf ren, Specialist in Ameri-
can Public Law, both of the American Law Division. Dr. Warren
Viessman, Jr., Senior Specialist in Engineering and Public Works,
contributed chapter 12; and Mr. William C. JolW, Analyst in En-
vironmental Policy, Environment and Natural Resources Division,
was responsible for chapter 13. In addition, appendixes C, F, Q, and R
were assembled by Mrs. McHugh ; appendixes D and S were prepared
by Mrs. Jones; and information in the remaining appendixes was
collected by Dr. Morrison.
I trust that this report will serve the needs of the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation as well as those of other
committees and individual Members of Congress who are concerned
with weather modification. On behalf of the Congressional Research
Service, I wish to express my appreciation for the opportunity to
undertake this timely and worthwhile assignment.
Sincerely,
Gilbert Gtjde,
Director.
(VII)
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2013
http://archive.org/details/weatificatOOunit
CONTENTS
Page
Letter of transmittal in
Letter requesting study v
Letter of submittal vn
Summary and conclusions xix
Chapter 1
Introduction and summary of issues 1
Perspective 1
Situation 1
Advantages 3
Timeliness 5
Definitions and scope of report 7
Summary of issues in planned weather modification 9
Technological problems and issues 9
Governmental issues 12
The role of the Federal Government 12
Roles of State and local governments 14
Legal issues 15
Private rights in the clouds 15
Liability for weather modification 16
Interstate legal issues 17
International legal issues 17
Economic issues 18
Issues complicating economic analyses of weather modifica-
tion 18
Weather modification and conflicting interests 19
Social issues 19
Social factors 20
Need for public education on weather modification 21
Decisionmaking 22
International issues 23
Ecological issues 24
Chapter 2
History of weather modification 25
Introduction 25
History of weather modification prior to 1946 26
Prescientific period 26
Early scientific period 27
Development of scientific fundamentals 32
Early cloud-seeding experiments 34
Weather modification since 1946 35
Chronology 35
Langmuir, Schaefer, and Vonnegut 37
Research projects since 1947 39
Project Cirrus 39
The Weather Bureau cloud phvsics project 41
The U.S. experiments of 1953-54 42
Arizona Mountain cumulus experiments 44
Project Whitetop 44
Climax experiments 45
Lightning suppression experiments 46
Fog dispersal research 46
Hurricane modification. 46
Hail suppression 46
Foreign weather modification research 47
Commercial operations 48
History of Federal activities, committees, policy studies, and
reports 53
(IX)
X
Chapter 3
Page
Technology of planned weather modification 55
Introduction 55
Assessment of the status of weather modification technology 56
Classification of weather modification technologies 61
Principles and status of weather modification technologies 62
Precipitation augmentation 64
Cumulus clouds 66
Cumulus modification experiments 67
Effectiveness of precipitation enhancement research and
operations 69
Results achieved through cumulus modification 70
Recent advances in cumulus cloud modification 71
Orographic clouds and precipitation 71
Orographic precipitation modification 75
Orographic seeding experiments and seedability criteria 77
Operational orographic seeding projects 81
Results achieved through orographic precipitation modifi-
cation 82
Hail suppression 84
The hail problem 84
Modification of hail 86
Hail seeding technologies 87
Evaluation of hail suppression technology 88
Surveys of hail suppression effectiveness 89
Conclusions from the TASH study 91
Dissipation of fog and stratus clouds 92
Cold fog modification 93
Warm fog modification 93
Lightning suppression 96
Lightning modification 98
Evaluation of lightning suppression technology 99
Modification of severe storms 101
Hurricanes 101
Generation and characteristics of hurricanes 104
Modification of hurricanes 108
Tornadoes 112
Modification of tornadoes 113
Technical problem areas in planned weather modification 115
Seeding technology 115
Evaluation of weather modification projects 118
Extended area effects of weather modification 124
Approaches to weather modification other than seeding 129
Research needs for the development of planned weather modification- 131
General considerations 131
Recommendations from the 1973 National Academv of Sciences
study i 134
Recommendations of the Advanced Planning Group of NOAA__. 136
Summary of Federal research needs expressed by State officials. 138
Research recommendations of the AMS Committee on Weather
Modification 139
Research recommendations related to extended area and time
effects 143
Chapter 4
Inadvertent weather and climate modification 145
Introduction 145
Terminology 145
Climate 145
Climatic fluctuation and climatic change 146
Weather 146
Weather modification 146
Climate modification 146
Planned climate modification 147
Inadvertent climate modification 148
XI
Page
Background 149
Historical perspective 149
Understanding the causes of climatic change and variability 151
The concept of climatic change and variability 152
When and how do climatic changes occur 154
The facts about inadvertent weather and climate modification 156
Airborne particulate matter and atmospheric turbidity 156
Do more particles mean a warming or cooling? 157
Sources of atmospheric particulates: Natural vs. manmade.. 158
Atmospheric processes affected by particulates 159
The La Porte weather anomaly: Urban climate modification. 162
Carbon dioxide and water vapor 164
Increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration:
What the record indicates 164
Predicting future atmospheric carbon dioxide levels 166
Sources and sinks for carbon dioxide 168
Atmospheric effects of increased carbon dioxide levels 169
Implications of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide con-
centrations 169
Implications of a climatic warming 170
Carbon dioxide and future climate: The real climate vs.
"model climate" 171
Ozone depletion 172
Concerns regarding ozone destruction 172
Action by the Government on the regulation of fluorocar-
bons 175
Climatic effects of ozone depletion 176
Waste heat 177
The urban "Heat Island" 177
Albedo 179
Large-scale irrigation 180
Recapitulation 181
Issues in inadvertent weather and climate modification 184
Climatic barriers to long-term energy growth 184
Thoughts and reflections — Can we contemplate a fossil-fuel-free
world? 185
Research needs and deficiencies 186
Chapter 5
Federal activities in weather modification 193
Overview of Federal activities..-- '— — 193
Legislative and congressional activities 194
Federal legislation on weather modification 194
Summary 194
The Advisory Committee on Weather Control 195
Direction to the National Science Foundation 196
Reporting of weather modification activities to the Federal
Government 197
The National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976 198
Congressional direction to the Bureau of Reclamation 201
Proposed Federal legislation on weather modification 203
Summary 203
Legislation proposed in the 94th Congress and the 95th
Congress, 1st sessions 205
Other congressional activities 207
Resolutions on weather modification 207
Hearings 208
Studies and reports by congressional support agencies 209
Activities of the executive branch 209
Introduction 209
Institutional structure of the Federal weather modification
program 210
Current status of Federal organization for weather modifica-
tion 210
xn
3?a?e
Federal structure; 1946-57 214
Federal structure; 1958-68 215
Federal structure; 1968-77 216
Future Federal organization for weather modification 216
Coordination and advisory mechanisms for Federal weather
modification programs 221
Introduction 221
The Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences
(ICAS) 222
The National Academv of Sciences/Committee on At-
mospheric Sciences (N AS/CAS) 226
The National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmos-
phere (NACOA) 227
Other coordination and advisory mechanisms 228
Weather Modification Advisory Board 231
Weather modification activities reporting program 232
Background and regulations 232
Reporting of Federal activities 233
Summary reports on U.S. weather modification activities 233
Federal studies and reports on weather modification 234
Introduction 234
Studies of the early 1950's 235
Advisory Committee on Weather Control 236
National Academy of Sciences studies 237
Studies bv the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences (ICAS) 238
Domestic Council study 239
Policy and planning reports produced by Federal agencies 239
Federal programs in weather modification 241
Introduction and funding summaries 241
Department of the Interior 246
Introduction 246
Project Skywater; general discussion 247
The Colorado River Basin Pilot Project (CRBPP) 254
The High Plains Cooperative Program (HIPLFX) 258
The Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project (SCPP) 263
Drought mitigation assistance 266
National Science Foundation 267
Introduction and general 267
Weather hazard mitigation 274
Weather modification technology development 282
Inadvertent weather modification 283
Societal utilization activities 287
Agricultural weather modification 288
Department of Commerce 290
Introduction and general discussion 290
The Florida Area Cumulus Experiment (FACE) 292
Project Stormfurv 296
Research Facilities Center (RFC) 300
Global Monitoring for Climatic Change (GMCC) 301
Lightning suppression 302
Modification of extratropical severe storms 302
Department of Defense 303
Introduction 303
Air Force fog dispersal operations 303
Army research and development 304
Navy research and development 304
Air Force research and development 305
Overseas operations 307
Department of Transportation 308
Department of Agriculture 309
Department of Energy 310
XIII
Chapter 6
Review of recommendations for a national program in weather modifica- Page
tion 313
Introduction ^Jy
Summaries of major weather modification reports 314
Final report of the Advisory Committee on Weather Control — 314
Weather and climate modification: Report of the Special Com-
mission on Weather Modification 315
Weather and climate modification: Problems and prospects 317
A recommended national program in weather modification 318
A national program for accelerating progress in weather modifica-
tion 320
Weather and climate modification: Problems and progress 321
Annual reports to the President and Congress by NACOA 323
Need for a national weather modification research program 324
The Federal role in weather modification 325
Trends and analysis 326
Chapter 7
State and local activities in weather modification 331
Overview of State weather modification activities 331
Introduction 331
North American Interstate Weather Modification Council 333
Survey and summary of State interests and activities in weather
modification 340
State contacts for information on weather modification activities. 343
Non-Federal U.S. weather modification activities 343
Analysis of calendar year 1975 projects 344
Preliminary analysis of projects for calendar years 1976-77_ 347
General discussion of local and regional weather modification policy
activities „ 348
Weather modification activities within particular States 351
California 352
State weather modification law and regulations 352
Weather modification projects 353
State-sponsored emergency projects 356
Illinois 358
Illinois weather modification law and its administration 358
Operational projects 359
Research activities 360
Kansas 361
Kansas Weather Modification Act 361
Research activities 362
Operational activities 364
Emergenc}- Drought Act of 1977 364
North Dakota 365
Weather modification law and administration of regulations- 365
Authority and organization for local projects 370
North Dakota operational projects in 1975 and 1976 371
South Dakota 376
Utah 381
Washington 382
Chapter 8
Private activities in weather modification 385
Introduction 385
Commercial weather modifiers 386
Scope and significance of contract activities 386
Summary of contract services 386
Evaluation and research by commercial firms 388
Participation in Federal research programs 389
Weather modification organizations 389
Professional organizations 389
Weather Modification Association 390
American Meteorological Society 395
XIV
Page
Opposition to weather modification 399
General discussion 399
Opposition to the seeding project above Hungry Horse Dam. 399
Tri-State Natural Weather Association 400
Citizens for the Preservation of Natural Resources 402
Chapter 9
Foreign'activities in weather modification 405
Introduction 405
World Meteorological Organization register of weather modification
projects 408
Description of weather modification activities in some foreign nations. 412
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 412
Overview of projects in the U.S.S.R 412
Summary of weather modification and related atmospheric
research in the U.S.S.R 413
Israel 415
Australia 416
Canada 418
Mexico 419
People's Republic of China 420
Kenya 421
Republic of South Africa 422
Rhodesia 423
India 423
The Swiss hail experiment 424
Chapter 10
International aspects of weather modification 427
Introduction 427
Convention on the prohibition of military or any other hostile use of
environmental modification techniques 429
Development of the treaty 429
Criticism of the convention 431
Activities since the United Nations approval of the convention.. 432
Activities of the World Meteorological Organization in weather
modification 433
Precipitation enhancement program (PEP) 434
Other WMO activities in weather modification 436
Registration and reporting of weather modification projects. 436
WMO conferences on weather modification 436
Typhoon and serious storm modification 437
Global atmospheric research programme 437
Legal aspects of weather modification 437
United Nations Conference on the Human Environment 438
Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human
Environment 438
Action Plan for the Human Environment 438
Earthwatch Program 439
Study of Man's Impact on Climate 439
Other international activities 440
United States/Canadian agreement 440
North American Interstate Weather Modification Council 440
Congressional activities 441
Weather modification as a weapon of war 441
Senate Resolution 71, prohibiting environmental modification
as a weapon of war 441
Congressional activities related to hostile use of weather
modification, 1974-76 442
Other Congressional actions relating to weather modification 443
Senate Concurrent Resolution 67 — U.S. participation in the
world weather program 443
National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976 444
Senate Resolution 49 444
XV
Page
U.S. foreign policy 444
Various executive branch proposals 445
National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere 447
Activities in 1977 448
Chapter 11
Legal aspects of weather modification 449
Domestic 449
Private rights in the clouds 449
Liability for weather modification 453
Defenses which may be raised against claims of liability 456
Interstate allocation of atmospheric water 457
Methods of controlling weather modification 459
Congressional authority under the Constitution to regulate or
license weather modification activities 461
Federalism 461
The commerce clause 461
The commerce clause generally 462
The commerce clause and the regulation of navigable
waters 463
Limitations on the commerce power 464
Fiscal powers 465
War powers 466
Property power 466
Treaty power 467
Conclusion 467
International 468
Certain hostile uses of weather modification are prohibited 471
Nations are responsible for environmental conduct which causes
injury or damage in or to other nations 471
Nations are liable for injuries sustained by aliens within their
territory caused by tortuous conduct in violation of inter-
national law 472
Nations or their citizens may be liable for injury and damage
they caused to citizens of another nation occurring in that
nation 472
Chapter 12
Economic aspects of weather modification 475
Introduction 475
Economic setting 476
Economic aspects of weather modification procedures 477
Fog dispersal 477
Precipitation augmentation 478
Orographic cloud seeding 478
Convective cloud seeding 478
Precipitation augmentation and energy considerations 479
Hail suppression 480
Lightning suppression and reduction in storm damage 480
Analytic methods for economic analysis 481
Case studies of the economics of weather modification 482
Hungry Horse Area, Montana 482
Connecticut River basin 483
State of Illinois 483
Nine-county Southeastern Crop Reporting District, South Dakota, 483
Colorado River 484
Conclusions 486
Chapter 13
Ecological effects of weather modification 487
Introduction 487
Modification of weather and climate 487
Ecology and ecological systems — 487
Knowledge of ecological implications of applied weather modifi-
cation technologies 488
XVI
Page
Important variables 490
Temporal considerations 491
Season of modification effort 491
Duration of effort: Short- v. long-term 491
Regularity of modification effort 491
Ecosystem type 492
Aquatic v. terrestrial systems 492
Cultivated v. natural systems 492
Arid v. humid systems 492
Cumulative and synergistic effects 492
Effects of silver iodide* 493
Deliberate weather modification 496
Precipitation enhancement 496
Increased rainfall 496
Snowpack augmentation 497
Severe storm abatement 498
Fog dispersal 499
Hail suppression 499
Alteration or arrest of lightning discharges 499
Inadvertent weather modification 499
Extra-area effects 499
Long-term, climatic, and global implications 500
Summary and conclusions 501
Appendixes
A. Statement on weather modification in Congressional Record of
June 17, 1975, by Congressman Gilbert Gude, containing White
House statement on Federal weather modification policy 503
B. Department of Defense statement on position on weather modification. 509
C. Text of United Nations Convention on the prohibition of military
or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques 510
D. State statutes concerning weather modification 514
Arizona 515
California 516
Colorado 520
Connecticut 528
Florida 529
Hawaii 531
Idaho 531
Illinois 533
Iowa 541
Kansas 543
Louisiana 549
Minnesota 550
Montana 554
Nebraska 557
Nevada 565
New Hampshire 571
New Mexico 571
New York 573
North Dakota 573
Oklahoma 584
Oregon 59 1
Pennsylvania 599
South* Dakota 604
Texas 600
Utah 612
Washington 613
West Virginia 618
Wisconsin 622
Wyoming 622
E. List of State contacts for further information on weather modification
activities within the States 625
F. Agreement on exchange of information on weather modification
between the United States of America and Canada 627
XVII
G. Weather modification activities in the United States during calendar Pa?e
year 1975 630
H. Selected bibliography of publications in weather modification 641
I. Public laws dealing specifically with weather modification 640
J. Summary of language in congressional documents supporting public
works appropriations for the Bureau of Reclamation's atmospheric
water resources program 655
K. Membership and charter of the U.S. Department of Commerce
Weather Modification Advisory Board 660
L. Rules and regulations and required forms for submitting information
on weather modification activities to the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, in
accordance with requirements of Public Law 92-205 662
M. Selected State rules and regulations for the administration of State
weather modification statutes 676
Illinois 676
Kansas 6 S3
North Dakota 691
Utah 707
Washington 712
N. Documents of the Weather Modification Association 717
O. Policy statement of the American Meteorological Society on purposeful
and inadvertent modification of weather and climate 722
P. Reporting agencies of member countries and questionnaire circulated
to receive weather modification information from members of the
World Meteorological Organization 724
Q. Report of the World Meteorological Organization/ United Nations
Environment programme informal meeting on legal aspects of
weather modification 727
R. Text of Senate Resolution 71; considered, amended, and agreed to
July 11, 1973 734
S. Reported cases on weather modification 740
T. Glossary of selected terms in weather modification 741
34-857—79 2
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Weather modification is generally considered to be the deliberate
effort to improve atmospheric conditions for beneficial human pur-
poses— to augment water supplies through enhanced precipitation or
to reduce economic losses, property damages, and deaths through
mitigation of adverse effects of hail, lightning, fog, and severe storms.
Not all weather modification activities, however, have been or can be
designed to benefit everyone, and some intentional operations have
been used, or are perceived to have been used, as a weapon of war
to impede the mobility or tactical readiness of an enemy. Further-
more, environmental change is also effected unintentionally and with-
out any purpose at all, as man inadvertently modifies the weather and
climate, whether for better or worse scientists are not certain, through
activities such as clearing large tracts of land, building urban areas,
and combustion of fossil fuels.
Historically, there have been attempts, often nonscientific or pseudo-
scientific at best, to change the weather for man's benefit. Until the
20th century, however, the scientific basis for such activities was
meager, with most of our current understanding of cloud physics and
precipitation processes beginning to unfold during the 1930's. The
modern period in weather modification is about three decades old, dat-
ing from events in 1946, when Schaefer and Langmuir of the General
Electric Co. demonstrated that a cloud of supercooled water droplets
could be transformed into ice crystals when seeded with dry ice. Soon
afterward it was discovered that fine particles of pure silver iodide,
with crystal structure similar to that of ice, were effective artificial
ice nuclei, and that seeding clouds with such particles could produce
ice crystals at temperatures just below freezing. Silver iodide remains
the most often used material in modern "cloud seeding."
By the 1950's, many experimental and operational weather modifi-
cation projects were underway; however, these early attempts to
augment precipitation or to alter severe storm effects were often in-
conclusive or ineffective, owing to improper experimental design, lack
of evaluation schemes, and the primitive state of the technology.
Through research programs over the past two decades, including
laboratory studies and field experiments, understanding of atmos-
pheric processes essential to improved weather modification tech-
nology has been advanced. Sophisticated evaluation schemes have been
developed, using elaborate statistical tools; there has also been im-
provement in measuring instruments and weather radar systems ; and
simulation of weather processes using numerical models and high
speed computers has provided further insights. Meanwhile, commer-
cial weather modifiers, whose number decreased dramatically along
with the total area of the United States covered by their operations
after the initial surge of the 1950 era, have grown in respectability and
competence, and their operations have incorporated improvements as
they benefited from their accumulated experience and from the re-
(XIX)
XX
suits of research projects. Since such operations are designed for prac-
tical results, such as increased precipitation or reduced hail, however,
the sophisticated evaluation procedures now used in most research
projects are most often not used, so that the effectiveness of the opera-
tions is frequently difficult to assess.
Weather modification is at best an emerging technology. Progress in
development of the technology over the past 30 years has been slow,
although there has been an increased awareness of the complex nature
of atmospheric processes and a steady improvement in basic under-
standing of those processes which underlie attempts at deliberate modi-
fication of weather phenomena. Though most cloud-seeding practices
are based on a common theory and form the basis for a number of seed-
ing objectives, there are really a series of weather modification
technologies, each tailored to altering a particular atmospheric pheno-
menon and each having reached a different state of development and
operational usefulness. For example, cold fog clearing is now consid-
ered to be operational, while, at the other extreme, the abatement of
severe storms such as hurricanes remains in the initial research phase.
Development progress for each of these technologies appears to be
much less a function of research effort expended than a dependence on
the fundamental atmospheric processes and the ease by which they can
be altered. There continues to be obvious need for further research and
development to refine those few techniques for which there has been
some success and to advance technology where progress has been slow
or at a virtual standstill.
The following summary provides a reasonably accurate assessment
of the current status of weather modification technology :
1. The only routine operational projects are for clearing cold fog.
Research on warm fog has yielded some useful knowledge and good
models, but the resulting technologies are so costly that they are usable
mainly for military purposes and very busy airports.
2. Several longrunning efforts to increase winter snowpack by seed-
ing clouds in the mountains suggest that precipitation can be increased
by some 15 percent over what would have happened "naturally."
3. A decade and a half of experience with seeding winter clouds on
the U.S. west coast and in Israel, and summer clouds in Florida, also
suggest a 10- to 15-percent increase over "natural" rainfall. Hypotheses
and techniques from the work in one area are not directly transferable
to other areas, but will be helpful in designing comparable experiments
with broadly similar cloud systems.
4. Numerous efforts to increase rain by seeding summer clouds in the
central and western parts of the United States have left many questions
unanswered. A major experiment to try to answer them — for the High
Plains area — is now in its early stages.
5. It is scientifically possible to open holes in wintertime cloud layers
by seeding them. Increasing sunshine and decreasing energy consmp-
tion may be especially relevant in the northeastern quadrant of the
United States.
0. Some $10 million is spent by private and local public sponsors for
cloud-seeding efforts, but these projects arc not designed as scientific
experiments and it is difficult to say for sure that operational cloud
seeding causes the claimed results.
XXI
7. Knowledge about hurricanes is improving with good models of
their behavior. But the experience in modifying that behavior is primi-
tive so far. It is inherently difficult to find enough test cases, especially
since experimentation on typhoons in the Western Pacific has been
blocked for the time being by international political objections.
8. Although the Soviets and some U.S. private operators claim some
success in suppressing hail by seeding clouds, our understanding of the
physical processes that create hail is still weak. The one major U.S.
held experiment increased our understanding of severe storms, but
otherwise proved mostly the dimensions of what we do not yet know.
9. There have been many efforts to suppress lightning by seeding
thunderstorms. Our knowledge of the processes involved is fair, but the
technology is still far from demonstrated, and the U.S. Forest Service
has recently abandoned further lightning experiments.1
Modification processes may also be initiated or triggered inadvert-
ently rather than purposefully, and the possibility exists that society
may be changing the climate through its own actions by pushing on
ceitain leverage points. Inadvertently, man is already causing measur-
able variations on the local scale. Artificial climatic effects have been
observed and documented on local and regional scales, particularly in
and downwind of heavily populated industrial areas where waste heat,
particulate pollution and altered ground surface characteristics are
primarily responsible for the perceived climate modification. The cli-
mate in and near large cities, for example, is warmer, the daily range
of temperature is less, and annual precipitation is greater than if the
cities had neA^er been built. Although not verifiable at present, the time
may not be far off when human activities will result in measurable
large-scale changes in weather and climate of more than passing sig-
nificance. It is important to appreciate the fact that the role of man at
this global level is still controversial, and existing models of the gen-
eral circulation are not yet capable of testing the effects in a conclusive
manner.
Nevertheless, a growing fraction of current evidence does point to
the possibility of unprecedented impact on the global climate by hu-
man activities, albeit the effects may be occurring below the threshold
where they could be statistically detected relative to the record of nat-
ural fluctuations and. therefore, could be almost imperceptible amid
the ubiquitous variability of climate. But while the degree of influence
on world climate may as yet be too small to detect against the back-
ground of natural variations and although mathematical models of
climatic change are still imperfect, significant global effects in the
future are inferred if the rates of growth of industry and population
persist.
For over 30 years both legislative and executive branches of the
Federal Government have been involved in a number of aspects of
weather modification. Since 1947 about 110 weather modification bills
pertaining to research support, operations, grants, policy studies, regu-
lations, liabilities, activity reporting, establishment of panels and com-
mittees, and international concerns have been introduced in the Con-
1 Weather Modification Advisory Board. "A U.S. Policy to Enhance the Atmospheric
Environment," Oct. 21, 1977. In testimony by Harlan Cleveland. Weather modification.
Hearing before the Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere, Committee on
Science and Technology. U.S. House of Representatives. 93th Cong., 1st sess., Oct. 26,
1977, Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977. pp. 28-30.
XXII
gress. Resolutions, mostly concerned with using weather modification
ns a weapon and promotion of a United Nations treaty banning such
activities, have also been introduced in both houses of the Congress ;
one such resolution was passed by the Senate.
Six public laws specifically dealing with weather modification have
been enacted since 1953, and others have included provisions which are
in some way relevant to weather modification. Federal weather modi-
fication legislation has dealt primarily with three aspects — research
program authorization and direction, collection and reporting of in-
formation on weather modification activities, and the commissioning
of major policy studies. In addition to direction through authorizing
legislation, the Congress initiated one major Federal research pro-
gram through a write-in to an appropriations bill; this program
regularly receives support through additional appropriations beyond
recommended OMB funding levels.
There are two Federal laws currently in effect which are specifically
concerned with weather modification. Public Law 92-205, of Decem-
ber 18, 1971, and its amendments requires the reporting of all non-
Federal activities to the Secretary of Commerce and publication "from
time to time" of summaries of such activities by the Secretary of
Commerce.2 The National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976
(Public Law 94-490), enacted October 13, 1976, directed the Secretary
of Commerce to conduct a major study on weather modification and to
submit a report containing a recommended Federal policy and Fed-
eral research program on wTeather modification. The Secretary ap-
pointed a non-Government Weather Modification Advisory Board to
conduct the mandated study, the report on which is to be submitted
to the Secretary for her review and comment and subsequent trans-
mittal to the President and the Congress during 1978. It is expected
that, following receipt of the aforementioned report, the Congress will
consider legislation on Federal weather modification policy, presuma-
bly during the 96th Congress.
Congressional interest in weather modification has also been mani-
fested in a number of hearings on various bills, in oversight hearings
on pertinent ongoing Federal agency programs, in consideration of
some 22 resolutions having to do with weather modification, and in
commissioning studies on the subject by congressional support
agencies.
The principal involvement in weather modification of the Federal
Government has been through the research and development programs
of the several Federal departments and agencies. Although Federal
research programs can be traced from at least the period of World
War II, the programs of most agencies other than the Defense Depart-
ment were not begun until the 1950's and 1960's. These research and
development programs have been sponsored at various times by at
least eight departments and independent agencies — including the De-
partments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Interior, and
Transportation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), and the National Science Foundation (NSF). In fiscal year
2 Although Federal agencies were excluded from the requirements of this not. upon
Tnutu.il agreement, the agencies also submit information on their weather mollification
projects to tlie Secretary of Commerce, so that there is a single repository for information
on nil weather modification activities conducted within the United States.
XXIII
1978 six agency programs were reported, those of Transportation and
NASA having been phased out, while that of Agriculture was severely
curtailed.
Total funding for Federal weather modification research in fiscal
year 1978 is estimated at about $17 million, a decline from the highest
funding level of $20 million reached in fiscal year 1976. The largest
programs are those of the Departments of Interior and Commerce and
of the NSF. The NSF has supported weather modification research
over a broad spectrum for two decades, although its fiscal year 1978
funding was reduced by more than 50 percent, and it is not clear that
more than the very basic atmospheric science supportive of weather
modification will be sponsored hereafter by the Foundation.
The present structure of Federal organization for weather modifi-
cation research activities is characterized essentially by the mission-
oriented approach, whereby each of the agencies conducts its own
program in accordance with broad agency goals or under specific direc-
tions from the Congress or the Executive. Programs have been loosely
coordinated through various independent arrangements and/or advi-
sory panels and particularly through the Interdepartmental Commit-
tee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS). The ICAS, established in 1959
by the former Federal Council for Science and Technology, provides
advice on matters related to atmospheric science in general and has
also been the principal coordinating mechanism for Federal research
in weather modification.
In 1958 the National Science Foundation was designated lead agency
for Federal weather modification research by Public Law 85-510, a
role which it maintained until 1968, when Public Law 90-407 removed
this responsibility from NSF. No further action was taken to name a
lead agency, although there have been numerous recommendations to
designate such a lead agency, and several bills introduced in the Con-
gress would have named either the Department of the Interior or the
Department of Commerce in that role. During the 10-year period from
1958 to 1968 the NSF promoted a vigorous research program through
grants to various research organizations, established an Advisory
Panel for Weather Modification, and published a series of 10 annual
reports on weather modification activities in the United States. Since
1968 there has been a lapse in Federal weather modification policy and
in the Federal structure for research programs, although, after a
hiatus of over 3 years, the responsibility for collecting and disseminat-
ing information on weather modification activities was assigned to the
Commerce Department in 1971. An important consideration of any
future weather modification legislation will probably be the organiza-
tional structure of the Federal research program and that for admin-
istration of other related functions which may be the responsibility of
the Federal Government. Options include a continuation of the present
mission-oriented approach with coordination through the ICAS or a
similar interagency body, redesignation of a lead agency with some
autonomy remaining with the several agencies, or creation of a single
agency with control of all funding and all research responsibilities.
The latter could be an independent agency or part of a larger depart-
ment ; it would presumably also administer other aspects of Federal
weather modification responsibilities, such as reporting of activities,
XXIV
regulation and licensing, and monitoring and evaluation of operations,
if a n}' or all of these functions should become or continue to be services
performed at the Federal level.
In addition to specific research programs sponsored bv Federal agen-
cies, there are other functions related to weather modification which
are performed in several places in the executive branch. Various Fed-
eral advisory panels and committees and their staffs — established to
conduct in-depth studies and prepare comprehensive reports, to pro-
vide advice and recommendations, or to coordinate Federal weather
modification programs — have been housed and supported within exec-
utive departments, agencies, or offices. The program whereby Federal
and non-Federal U.S. weather modification activities are reported to
the Government is administered by the National Oceanic and Atmos-
pheric Administration (NOAA) within the Commerce Department.
The State Department negotiates agreements with other nations which
might be affected by U.S. experiments and has arranged for Federal
agencies and other U.S. investigators to participate in international
meteorological projects, including those in weather modification. In
the United Nations, the United States has been active in promoting the
adoption of a treaty banning weather modification as a military
weapon.
In accordance with the mandates of several public laws or self-ini-
tiated bv the agencies or interagency committees, the executive branch
of the Federal Government has undertaken a number of major weather
modification policy studies over the past 25 years. Each of the com-
pleted major studies was followed by a report which included findings
and recommendations. The most recent study is the one noted earlier
that is being conducted by the Weather Modification Advisory Board
on behalf of the Secretarv of Commerce, pursuant to requirements of
the National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976. Nearly all
previous studies emphasized the needs for designation of a lead agency,
increased basic meteorological research, increased funding, improve-
ment of support and cooperation from agencies, and consideration of
legal, socioeconomic, environmental, and international aspects. Other
recommendations have included improvement of program evaluation,
studv of inadvertent effects, increased regulation of activities, and a
number of specific research projects. Although some of the recom-
mended activities have been undertaken, many have not resulted in
specific actions to date. Almost invariably it was pointed out in the
studies that considerable progress would result from increased fund-
ing. Although funding for weather modification research has increased
over t he past 20 years, most funding recommendations have been for
considerably higher levels than those provided. Since fiscal year 1976,
the total Federal research funding for weather modification research
hn=. in fact, decreased.
Most States in the Nation have some official interest in weather
modification ; 29 of them have some form of law which relates to such
activities, usually concerned with various facets of regulation or con-
trol of operations within the Slate and sometimes pertaining to au-
thorization for funding research and/or operations at the State or
local level. A State's weather modification law usually reflects its gen-
eral policy toward weather modification; some State laws tend to en-
XXV
courage development and use of the technology, while others dis-
courage such activities.
The current legal regime regulating weather modification has been
developed by the States rather than the Federal Government, except
in the areas of research support, commissioning studies, and requiring
reporting of activities. The various regulatory and management func-
tions which the States perform include: (1) issuance, renewal, sus-
pension, and revocation of licenses and permits; (2) monitoring and
collecting of information on activities through requirements to main-
tain records, submission of periodic activity reports, and inspection
of premises and equipment; (3) funding and managing of State or
locally organized operational and/or research programs ; (4) evalua-
tion and advisory services to locally organized public and private op-
erational programs within the State; and (5) miscellaneous admin-
istrative activities, including the organization and operation of State
agencies and boards which are charged with carrying out statutory
responsibilities. Administration of the regulatory and managerial re-
sponsibilities pertaining to weather modification within the States is
accomplished through an assortment of institutional structures, in-
cluding departments of water or natural resources, commissions, and
special governing or advisory groups. Often there is a combination of
two or more of these agencies or groups in a State, separating func-
tions of pure administration from those of appeals, permitting, or ad-
visory services.
Involvement in weather modification operational and research pro-
grams varies from State to State. Some support research only, while
others fund and operate both research and operational programs. In
some cases funding only is provided to localities, usually at the county
level, where operational programs have been established. The recent
1976-77 drought led some Western States to initiate emergency cloud-
seeding programs as one means of augmenting diminishing water sup-
plies. Research conducted by atmospheric and other scientists at State
universities or other research agencies may be supported in part with
State funds but is often funded by one of the major Federal weather
modification programs, such as that of the Bureau of Reclamation or
the National Science Foundation. In a few cases. States contribute
funds to a Federal research project which is conducted jointly with
the States and partly within their borders.
In 1975, 1976, and 1977, respectively, there were 58, 61, and 88 non-
federally supported weather modification projects, nearly all opera-
tional, conducted throughout the United States. These projects were
sponsored by community associations, airlines, utilities, private in-
terests, municipal districts, cities, and States. Eighty-five percent of
all projects in the United States during 1975 were carried out west of
Kansas City, with the largest number in California. In that State
there were 11 proipets in each of the vears 1975 and 1976, and 20
projects during 1977. The majority of these operational projects were
designed to increase precipitation; others were intended for sup-
pression of hail or dispersal of fogs, the latter principally at airports.
In most instances, the principal beneficiaries of weather modification
are the local or regional users, who include farmers and ranchers,
weather-related industries, municipalities, airports, and utilities —
XXVI
those individuals and groups whose economic well-being and whose
lives and property are directly subject to adverse consequences of
drought or other severe weather. It is at the local level where the need
to engage in weather modification is most keenly perceived and also
where possible negative effects from such activities are most apparent
to some sectors of the population. It follows that both the greatest sup-
port and the strongest opposition to weather modification projects are
focussed at the local level. The popularity of a particular project and
the degree of controversy surrounding it are frequently determined by
the extent to which local citizens and local organizations have had a
voice in the control or funding of the project. At the local level, deci-
sions to implement or to withdraw from a project can most often be
made with minimum social stress. Indeed, studies have shown that most
people are of the opinion that local residents or local government offi-
cials should make decisions on whether or not to use weather modifica-
tion technology in a given situation.
Many of the operational weather modification services provided for
private groups and governmental bodies within the States are carried
out under contract by commercial firms who have developed expertise
in a broad range of capabilities or who specialize in particular services
essential to both operational or research projects. Contracts may cover
only one season of the year, but a number of them are renewed an-
nually, with target areas ranging from a few hundred to a few thou-
sand square miles. In 197G, 6 of the 10 major companies having
substantial numbers of contracts received about $2.7 million for op-
erations in the United States, and a few of these companies also had
contracts overseas. Owing to increased demand for emergency pro-
grams during the recent drought, it is estimated that 1977 contracts
totaled about $3.5 million.
The initial role of the private weather modification operators was to
sustain activities during the early years, when there was often heated
scientific controversy with other meteorologists over the efficacy of
cloud seeding. Later, their operations provided a valuable data base
which permitted the early evaluation of seeding efforts and estimates
of potential prospects for the technology, meanwhile growing in com-
petence and public respect. Today, more often than not, they work
hand in hand with researchers and, in fact, they often participate in
research projects, contributing much of their knowhow acquired
through their unique experiences.
Important among private institutions concerned with weather modi-
fication are the professional organizations of which research and op-
erational weather modifiers and other interested meteorologists are
members. These include the American Meteorological Society, the
Weather Modifical ion Association, and the Irrigation and Drainage
Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Through the
meetings and publications of these organizations the scientific, tech-
nical, and legal problems and findings on weather modification are
aired and discussed. These groups also address other matters such as
statements of weather modification policy, opinions on pending legis-
lation, social implieations. and professional standards and certifica-
tion. Tn addition, the North American Interstate Weather Modifica-
tion Council is an organizai ion whose membership consists of govern-
XXVII
ments of U.S. States and Canadian Provinces and the Government of
Mexico, which serves as a forum for interstate coordination and ex-
change of information on weather modification.
Weather modification is often controversial, and both formal and
informal opposition groups have been organized in various sections
of the country. Reasons for such opposition are varied and are based
on both real and perceived adverse consequences from weather modifi-
cation. Sometimes with little or no rational basis there are charges
by these groups that otherwise unexplained and usually unpleasant
weather- related events are linked to cloud seeding. There are also cases
where some farmers are economically disadvantaged through receiving
more, or less than optimum rainfall for their particular crops, when
artificial inducement of such conditions may have indeed been planned
to benefit those growing different crops with different moisture re-
quirements. Opposition groups are often formed to protect the legiti-
mate rights of farmers under such circumstances.
While the United States is the apparent leader in weather modifi-
cation research and operations, other countries have also been active.
Information on foreign weather modification activities is not uni-
formly documented and is not always available. In an attempt to
assemble uniform weather modification activities information of its
member nations, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in
1975 instigated a system of reporting and of maintaining a register on
such activities. Under this arrangement 25 nations reported weather
modification projects during 1976, and 16 countries provided similar
information in 1975. The largest weather modification effort outside
the United States is in the Soviet Union, where there are both a con-
tinuing research program and an expanding operational program. The
latter is primarily a program designed to reduce crop damage from
hail, the largest such effort in the world, covering about 5 million
hectares (15 million acres) in 1976. Other countries with weather modi-
fication programs of some note include Canada, Israel, Mexico, and
the People's Republic of China. Projects in Rhodesia and the Republic
of South Africa are not reported through the WMO register since
these countries are not WMO member nations.
Recent years have seen increased international awareness of the
potential benefits and possible risks of weather modification technology
and increased international efforts to control such activities. The major
efforts of the international community in this area are to encourage
and maintain the high level of cooperation which currently exists in
weather prediction and research and to insure that man's new abilities
will be used for peaceful purposes. There has been exchange of ideas
on weather modification through international conferences and
through more informal exchanges of scientists and research documents.
As with many scientific disciplines, however, the problems arising
from use of and experiments with weather modification are not just
scientific in nature, but are political problems as well.
In addition to the problems of potential damage to countries through
commercial or experimental weather modification activities, another
growing area of concern is that weather modification will be used for
hostile purposes and that the future will bring weather warfare be-
tween nations. The United States has already been involved in one
XXVIII
such instance during the Vietnam war when attempts were made to
impede traffic by increasing rainfall during the monsoon season. In the
future, even the perception that weather modification techniques are
available or in use could lead to an increase in international tensions.
Natural drought in a region, or any other natural disaster will be
suspect or blamed on an enemy.
In light of these problems the international community has made
scattered attempts both to further the study of weather and its modifi-
cation and to insure the peaceful use of this new technology. One such
attempt was the development of the Convention on the Prohibition
of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification
Techniques, which was adopted by the General Assembly of the United
Nations and opened for signature on May 18. 19TT, at which time it was
signed by the United States and 33 other nations (though it has not
yet been submitted to the U.S. Senate for ratification) . Another exam-
ple of promotion of peaceful use of weather modification is the Pre-
cipitation Enhancement Program, sponsored by the WMQ, whose aim
is to plan, set up, and carry out an international, scientifically con-
trolled precipitation experiment in a semiarid region of the world
under conditions where the chances are optimal for increasing pre-
cipitation in sufficient amounts to produce economic benefits.
The United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, held
in June 1972 in Stockholm, has been the pivotal point in much recent
international environmental activity. It too has been an important
catalyst in international activities relating to weather modification
through portions of its "Declaration," its "Action Plan for the Human
Environment," its "Earthwatch Program," and its "Study of Man's
Impact on Climate."
Legal issues in weather modification are complex and unsettled.
They can be considered in at least four broad categories : private rights
in the clouds, liability for weather modification, interstate legal issues,
and international legal issues. Since the body of law on weather modi-
fication is slight, existing case law offers few guidelines to determine
these issues. Regarding the issue of private rights in the clouds, there
is no general statutory determination of ownership of atmospheric
water, so it is often necessary to use analogies to some general common
law doctrines pertaining to water distribution, although each such
doctrine has its own disadvantages when applied to weather modifica-
tion. Some State laws reserve ownership or right to use atmospheric
water to the State.
Issues of liability for damage may arise when drought, flooding,
or other severe weal her phenomena occur following attempts to modify
the weather. Such issues include causation, nuisance, strict liability,
trespass, negligence, and charges of pollution of the air and water
through introduction of artificial nucleants. Statutes of 10 States dis-
cuss weather modification liability: however, there is much variation
among the specific provisions of the laws in those States. Before a
case can be made for liability based on causation, it must be pro\en
that the adverse weather conditions were indeed induced by the wen: r
modifier; but, in fact, no one lias ever been able to establish causation
of damages through such activities in view of the scientific uncer-
tainties of weather modification.
XXIX
Significant issues may arise when weather modification activities
conducted in one State affect another State as well. There may be, for
example, the claim that seeding in one State has removed from the
clouds water that should have fallen in an adjacent State or that
excessive flooding resulted from cloud seeding in a State upwind.
Operation of cloud-seeding equipment near the border of one State
may also violate local or State regulations or prohibitions of such
operations in that State. There have been some attempts to resolve these
and other issues through specific legislation in some States and through
informal bilateral agreements. While no formal compacts currently
exist, some compacts allocating waters in interstate streams may be
applicable.
Because atmospheric processes operate independent of national
borders, weather modification is inherently of international concern,
and. international legal issues have similarities to domestic interstate
activities and dangers. Whereas domestic weather modification law is
confused and unsettled, international law in this area is barely in the
formative stage. In time, ramifications of weather modification may
lead to major international controversy.
Whereas the potential for long-term economic gains through weather
modification cannot be denied, current economic analyses are tenuous in
view of present uncertainty of the technology and the complex nature
of attendant legal and economic problems. Economic evaluation of
weather modification activities has therefore been limited to special,
localized cases, such as the dispersal of cold fog at airports, where
benefit-cost ratios greater than 5 to 1 have been realized through sav-
ings in delayed or diverted traffic. It has also been estimated, on the
basis of a 15-percent increase in snowpack through seeding orographic
clouds, that about 2 million additional acre-feet of water per year
could be produced in the Colorado River Basin, at a cost of about
$1.50 per acre-foot.
Costs of most weather modification operations are generally small
in relation to other costs in agriculture, for example, and are normally
l>elieved to be only a fraction of the benefits which could be achieved
from successful operations. However, if all the benefits and all the costs
are considered, benefit-cost ratios may be diminished. While direct co«ts
and benefits from weather modification are reasonably apparent, in-
direct costs and benefits are elusive and require further study of
sociological, legal, and ecological implications.
There are numerous cases of both real and perceived economic losses
which one or more sectors of the public may suffer while another
group is seeking economic advantage through some form of weather
modification. Overall benefits from weather modification are accord-
ingly reduced when net gains are determined from such instances of
mixed economic advantages and disadvantages. In fact, when mecha-
nisms are established for compensating those who have suffered losses
resultinof from weather modification, benefits to those groups seeking
economic gain through such projects will probably be accordingly
reduced.
Economically significant weather modification activities will have
an eventual ecological effect, though appearance of that effect may be
hidden or delayed by system resilience and/or confused by system
XXX
complexity. Prediction of ecological effects may never be possible with
any precision; however, the greater the precision with which the
weather modifier can predict results of his activities, the more pre-
cisely can the ecologist predict ecological effects. Such effects will
rarely be sudden or catastrophic, but will result from moderate
weather-related shifts in rates of reproduction, growth, and mortality
of plants and animals. Adjustments of plant and animal communities
will thus occur more slowly in regions of highly variable weather than
in those with more uniform conditions which are slowly changing with
some regularity over time. Deliberate weather modification, such as
precipitation augmentation, is likely to have a greater ecological im-
pact in semi-arid regions than in humid ones.
Widespread cloud seeding, using silver iodide, could result in esti-
mated local, temporary increases in silver concentrations in precipita-
tion approaching those in natural waters, but exchange rates would be
an order of magnitude lower than the natural exchange rates. Ex-
change rates will likely be many orders of magnitude less than those
rates at which plants and soils are adversely affected.
Conclusions
1. Weather modification is an emerging technology ; there is a wide
spectrum of capabilities to modify various weather phenomena, rang-
ing from the operational readiness of cold fog dispersal to little prog-
ress beyond initial research in the case of modifying severe storms
such as hurricanes.
2. Along with cold fog dispersal, the only other weather modifica-
tion capability showing near readiness for application is the aug-
mentation of winter snowpack through seeding mountain cloud sys-
tems. A probable increase of about 15 percent is indicated by a number
of experiments and longrunning operational seeding projects in the
western United States.
3. Most scientists and weather modification operators agree that
there is continued need for a wide range of research and development
activity both to refine weather modification techniques where there
has been some success and to advance capabilities in modifying other
weather phenomena where there has been much less or little progress.
4. Current Federal policy for weather modification research and
development follows the mission-oriented approach, where each agency
charged with responsibility for dealing with a particular national
problem is given latitude to seek the best approach or solution to the
problem; this approach or solution may involve weather modification.
5. The structure of Federal organization for weather modification
reflects the mission-oriented approach which is characteristic of the
current Federal policy, the programs loosely coordinated through ad-
visory groups and the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric
Sciences.
0. The interest of the Congress in weather modification has been
shown by the introduction of 110 bills related to the subject since
1017 — 0 of which have become public law — and the consideration of 22
resolutions on weather modification, one of which was passed by the
Senate.
7. A number of major weather modification policy studies have been
directed by public law or initiated within the executive branch over
xxxr
the past 25 years ; most of these studies recommended designation of
a lead agency, increased basic meteorological research, increased fund-
ing, improvement of support and cooperation from agencies, and con-
sideration of legal, socioeconomic, environmental, and international
aspects. Although some recommended actions have been undertaken,
others have not seen specific action to date.
8. While major policy studies have recommended increased funding
for Federal weather modification, research and development and fund-
ing has generally increased over the past 20 years, recommended levels
have been consistently higher than those provided, and funding has
actually decreased since fiscal year 1976.
9. With enactment of the National Weather Modification Policy
Act of 1976 and completion of the major policy study mandated by
that act, there is a fresh opportunity for the Congress to assess the
potential usefulness and problems in application of weather modifica-
tion technology and to establish a new Federal policy for weather
modification research and operations.
10. The principal role in regulating weather modification and in
supporting operational programs has been taken by the States, while
the role of the Federal Government has been support of research and
development programs.
11. The majority of the States (29) have some form of law which
relates to weather modification, and the general policy of a State
toward weather modification is usually reflected in the weather modi-
fication law of that State ; laws of some States tend to encourage devel-
opment and use of the technology, while others discourage such
activities.
12. The majority of operational weather modification projects in the
United States (58 of a total of 72, or 80 percent in calendar year 1975)
are conducted west of Kansas City, and the largest number of projects
has been in California (20 during 1977) ; most operational projects
are intended to increase precipitation, while others are designed to
suppress hail or disperse fog.
13. Both the greatest support and the strongest opposition to weather
modification projects are focused at the local level, where the economic
and personal interests of local organizations and individuals are most
directly affected; it follows that there is also the least social stress
when decisions to apply or withhold weather modification are made
at the local level.
14. Commercial weather modification operators have substained ac-
tivities since the early days, after which some operations fell into
disrepute, providing a valuable data base for evaluation of long-term
projects and developing expertise over a broad range of capabilities:
most have incorporated improvements into their technology as they
have benefited from accumulated experience and from research results.
15. While the United States is the apparent leader in overall research
and operational weather modification activities, there have been ap-
proximately 20 foreign countries in which activities are conducted an-
nually (25 countries reported such projects for 1976 through the
register of the World Meteorological Organization) ; the largest for-
eign program is that of the Soviet Union, whose operational hail
suppression program covered about 15 million acres in 1976, the largest
such effort in the world.
XXXII
16. The international community has attempted to further the study
o f weather modification and insure its peaceful use through the recent
development of a Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any
Other Hostile Use of Environmental Techniques (adopted by the
U.N. General Assembly and opened for signature in May 1977) and
through sponsorship by the World Meteorological Organization of
an international precipitation enhancement program.
17. Legal issues in weather modification are complex and unsettled;
they include resolution of problems of ownership of atmospheric water,
issues of liability, conflicting statutes and regulations of respective
e laws, and the need to develop a regime of relevant international
law.
18. Although the long-term potential for economic gains through
weather modification cannot be denied, attempts to quantify benefits
mnd costs from such activities will in most cases be difficult to undertake
on a practical basis until the technology is more highly developed and
control systems are perfected to permit reliable predictions of
outcomes.
19. Economically significant wreather modification will always have
an eventual ecological effect, though appearance of the effect may be
delayed or hidden by system resilience and/or confounded by system
complexity ; the more precisely the weather modifier can specify effects
lie will produce, the more precise can be the ecologist's prediction of
likely ecological effects.
20. Modification processes may also be initiated or triggered inad-
vertently rather than purposefully ; man is already causing measurable
variations unintentionally on the local scale, and artificial climate
effects have been observed on local and regional scales. Although not
veri fiable at present, the time may not be remote when human activities
will result in measurable large-scale changes in weather and climate
of more than passing significance.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ISSUES
(I?y Robert E. Morrison, Specialist in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research
Division, Congressional Research Service)
Perspective
uIt is entirely possible, were he wise enough, that man could produce
favorable effects, perhaps of enonnous practical significance, trans-
forming his environment to render it more salutary for his purposes.
This is certainly a matter which should be studied assiduously and
explored vigorously. The first steps are clear. In order to control
meteorological matters at all we nee d to understand them better than
we now do. When we understand fully ice can at least predict weather
with assurance for reasonable intervals in the future.
''With modem analytical devices, with a team of sound background
and high skills, it is possible today to do a piece of work in this field
which will render immediate benefits, and carry us for toward a more
thorough understanding of ultimate possibilities. By all means let us
get at it."
— Vanne var Bush 1
SITUATION
Two decades after completion of a major study and report on
weather modification by the Advisory Committee on Weather Control
and after the assertions quoted above, many would agree that some
of the more fundamental questions about understanding and using
weather modification remain unsolved. There is a great difference of
opinion, however, on the state of technology in this field. According
to Grant, "Some believe that weather modification is now ready for
widespread application. In strong contrast, others hold that applica-
tion of the technology may never be possible or practical on any
substantial scale." 2 It has been demonstrated that at least some atmos-
pheric phenomena can be modified with some degree of predictable
success, as a consequence of seeding supercooled clouds with artificial
ice nuclei, and there is some promise that the present technology will
be expanded to include a greater scope of weather modification capa-
bilities. Nevertheless, a systematic approach and reasonable progress
in development of weather modification technology have been impeded
by a number of problems.
Changnon asserts that a continuing and overriding problem restrict-
ing progress has been the attempt to apply an ill-defined technology
to increase rain or suppress hail without an adequate scientific under-
1 From statement of Dec. 2, 1957, quoted in final report of the Advisory Committee on
Weather Control, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office. 1958. vol. I. p. 1.
2 Grant, Lewis O., "Scientific and Other Uncertainties of Weather Modification. In
William A. Thomas (editor), Legal and Scientific Uncertainties of Weather Modification.
Proceedings of a symposium convened at Duke University. Mar. 11-3 2. 1976, by the
National Conference of Lawyers and Scientists, Durham, N.C., Duke University Press,
1977, p. 7.
(1)
34-857—79 3
2
standing and predictable outcome.3 Experimentation has been poorly
conducted, intermittent, or too short ; and "results have not been inte-
grated with those of other projects so as to develop a continuing thread
of improving knowledge." 4
In response to the query as to why progress in weather modification
lias been so slow, Fleagle identifies three broad, general impediments.
"First, the physical processes associated with clouds have turned out to
be especially complex and difficult * * *. A second possibility may be
that the atmosphere is inherently stable, so that within broad limits, no
matter what we do to increase precipitation, the results are likely to be
small and roughly the same * * *. A third reason * * * is that progress
has been hamstrung by fragmentation of resources, by submarginal
funding, ineffective planning and coordination, and a general lack of
administrative toughness and fiscal stability." 5
Droessler points out the need to "formulate a comprehensive national
weather modification policy which has the broad support of the scien-
tific community, the general public, private industry, and the Govern-
ment," contending that "the greatest deterrent in getting on with the
task of preparing a satisfactory national policy is the lack of a con-
sensus about the national goals for weather modification." 6
Although operational readiness varies from one form of weather
modification to another, as a result of the degree of understanding and
the complexity of decisionmaking in given situations, the prospects for
successful weather modification are sufficiently promising that at-
tempts to develop effective applications will continue. This was one of
the major areas of co?isensus at a recent symposium on the uncertainties
of weather modification :
There will be increased attempts to modify weather, both because people tend
to do what is technically possible and because the anticipated benefits of precipi-
tation augmentation, hail or lightning suppression, hurricane diversion, and other
activities often exceed the associated costs.7
With the inevitable increases in weather modification capabilities
and the increasing application of these capabilities, the development of
a technology that is socially useful must be insured through a careful
analysis of attendant benefits and disbenefits. According to Fleagle.
et al.. deliberate efforts to modify the weather have thus far had only
marginal societal impacts; however, as future activities expand, "they
will probably be accompanied by secondary effects which in many
instances cannot be anticipated in detail * * *." Consequently, "rational
policy decisions are urgently needed to insure that activities are di-
rected toward socially useful goals." 8
The lack of a capability to deal with impending societal problems
8 Changnori, Stanley A.. Jr.. "The Federal Role In Weather Modification." bgckgrbund
paper prepared for use by the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advi-
sory Board. Mar. !). 3 077, p. 5.
' Ibid., pp. ">-G.
s Fleagle. Robert O.. "An Analysis of Federal Policies in Weather Modification.'' back-
ground paper prepared for use by the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification
Adv:s< rv Hoard. Mar. 1<»77. pp. 17-18.
« Droessler, Farl (».. "Weather Modification" (Federal Policies. Funding From AIT
Sources Interagency Coordination), background paper prepared for use of the U.S. Depart-
ment of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board, Mar. l. l!>77. p. 10
7 Thomas. William A. (editor). "Legal and Scientific Uncertainties of Weather Modifie-i-
tion," proceedings of a Symposium convened at Duke University. Mar 11-12. 1970, by the
Vf»'onal Conference of Lawyers and Scientists. Durham, N.C., Dnke Universitv Pres.,
1077, p. vl.
Flt*agie. Robert r> • -lames A. Crutchfteld, Ralph W. Johnson, and Mohamed F. AbdO,
"Weather Modification in the PUbllC Interest." Seattle, American Meteorological Society
and the University of Washington Press, i<>73. p. 3, 31-32.
3
and emerging management issues in weather modification has been
aphoristically summed up in the following statement by Crutchfield:
Weather modification is in the throes of a serious schizoid process The slow
and sober business of piecing together the scientific knowledge of weather proc-
esses developing the capacity to model the complex systems involved, and assess-
ing systematically the results of modification efforts has led to responsible opti-
mism about the future of these new technologies. On the other hand, the social
technology" of evaluation, choice, and execution has lagged badly. Ihe present de-
cisionmaking apparatus appears woefully inadequate to the extraordinarily ^diffi-
cult task of fitting weather modification into man s pattern of life m optimal
fashion There are' too many game plans, too many coaches, and a disconcerting
proclivity for running hard before deciding which goal line to aim for— or, indeed,
which field to play on. ,J . . . _ .
Mounting evidence indicates that weather modification of several types is,
or may soon become technically feasible. That some groups will derive economic
or other social benefits from such technology is a spur to action. But a whole
thunderhead of critical questions looms on the horizon waiting to be resolved
before any valid decisions can be made about the scale, composition, location,
and management of possible operations.9
ADVANTAGES
In a study for the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric
Sciences, Homer E. Newell highlighted the potential benefits of inten-
tional weather modification :
The Earth's weather has a profound influence on agriculture, forestry, water
resources, industry, commerce, transportation, construction, field operations,
commercial fishing, and many other human activities. Adverse effects of weather
on man's activities and the Earth's resources are extremely costly, amounting
to billions of dollars per year, sometimes causing irreparable damage as when
human lives are lost in severe storms. There is, therefore, great motivation
to develop effective countermeasures against the destructive effects of weather,
and, conversely, to enhance the beneficial aspects. The financial and other ben-
efits to human welfare of being able to modify weather to augment water
supplies, reduce lightning, suppress hail, mitigate tornadoes, and inhibit the full
development of hurricanes would be very great.10
More recently. Louis J. Battan gave the following two reasons, with
graphic examples, for wanting to change the weather :
First, violent weather kills a great many people and does enormous property
damage. A single hurricane that struck East Pakistan in Novemlier 1970 killed
more than 250,000 people in a single day. Hurricane Camille hit the United States
in 1969 and did approximately $1.5 billion worth of damage. An outbreak of
tornadoes in the Chicago area on Palm Sunday of 1965 killed about 250 people,
and the tornadoes of April 1974 did likewise. Storms kill people and damage
property, and it is reasonable to ask whether it is necessary for us to accept
this type of geophysical destruction. I say, "No, it is not — it should be possible
to do something."
Second, weather modification involves, and in some respects might control,
the production of those elements we need to survive. Water and food are cur-
rently in short supply in many areas, and these shortages almost certainly will
be more severe in the future. We can develop new strains of wheat and rye and
corn and soybeans and rice, but all is for naught if the weather fails to coop-
erate. If the monsoons do not deliver on schedule in India, residents of that
country starve in large numbers. And if the drought that people have been
predicting for the last several years does spread over the Great Plains, there
will be starvation around the world on a scale never before experienced.
Weather is the one uncontrollable factor in the whole business of agriculture.
Hail, strong winds, and floods are the scourges of agriculture, and we should
not have to continue to remain helpless in the face of them. It may be impossible
9 Crntehfielri. James A.. "Social CVoice and Weather Modification : Concepts and Measure-
ment of Impact." In W. R. Derrick Sewell (editor). Modifying the Weather: a Social
Assessment, Victoria, British Columbia. University of Victoria. 1978. p. 1S7.
10 Newell. Homer E., "A Recommended National Program in Weather Modification." Fed-
eral Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric
Sciences, ICAS report No. 10a, Washington, D.C., November 1966, p. 1.
4
for us to develop the kind of technology we would like to have for modification
of weather, but to assume failure in such an important endeavor is a course
not to be followed by wise men.11
Specific statistics on annual losses of life and economic losses from
property damages resulting from weather-related disasters in the
United States are shown in table 1, which wras developed in a recent
study by the Domestic Council.12 In the table, for comparison, are
the fiscal year 1975 expenditures by the Federal Government in
weather modification research, according to the several categories of
weather phenomena to be modified. Although it is clear that weather
disasters can be mitigated only partially through weather modifica-
tion, even if the technology were fully developed, the potential value,
economic and otherwise, should be obvious. The following quotation
from a Federal report written over a decade ago summarizes the full
potential of benefits to mankind which might be realized through use
of this technology :
With advances in his civilization, man has learned how to increase the fruit
of the natural environment to insure a livelihood. * * * it is fortunate that
growing knowledge of the natural world has given him an increasing awareness
of the changes that are occurring in his environment and a' so hopefully some
means for deliberate modification of these trends. An appraisal of the prospects
for deliberate weather and climate modification can be directed toward the
ultimate goal of bringing use of the environment into closer harmony with its
capacities and with the purposes of man — whether this be for food production,
relief from floods, assuring the continuance of biologic species, stopping pollu-
tion, or for purely esthetic reasons.13
TABLE 1. — ANNUAL PROPERTY DAMAGE AND LOSS OF LIFE FROM WEATHER-RELATED DISASTERS AND HAZARDS
IN THE UNITED STATES AND FISCAL YEAR 1975 FEDERAL WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH FUNDING (FROM
DOMESTIC COUNCIL REPORT, 1975)
Property Modification
damage1 research
Weather hazard Loss of life1 (billions) (millions)
Hurricanes 2 30 2 $rj. 8 3 $o. 8
Tornadoes . 2140 2.4 4 1.0
Hail 5.8 3.9
Lightning « 110 .1 .4
Fog M.000 7.5 1.3
Floods 6 240 8 2.3
Frost (agriculture) 7 1. 1
Drought 7.7 93.4
Total 1,520 6.7 10.8
1 Sources: "Assessment of Research on Natural Hazards," Gilbert F. White and J. Eugene Haas, the MIT Press, Cam-
bridge, Mass., 1975, pp 68, 286, 305, 374; "The Federal Plan for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research, Fiscal
Year 1976," U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheiic Administration (NOAA), Washington, D.C.,
April 1975, p 9; "Weatheiwise," February 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, American Meteorological Society, Boston, Mass.;
"Summary Report on Weather Modification, Fiscal Years 1969, 1970, 1971," U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, Wash-
ington, D.C., May 1973, pp 72, 81; "Estimating Crop Losses Due to Hail — Wot king Data for County Estimates," U.S. De-
partment of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, September 1974; "Natural Disasters: Some Empirical and Economic
Considerations," G. Thomas Sav, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C., February 1974, p 19; Traffic Safety
magazine, National Safety Council, February 1974.
2 1970-74 average.
3 These funds do not include capital investment in research aircraft and instrumentation primarily for hurricane modi-
fication, which in fiscal year 1975 amounted to $9,200,000.
4 These funds support theoretical research on modification of extratropical cloud systems and their attendant severe
storms such as thunderstorms and tornadoes.
5 1973.
« 1950-72 average.
7 Average.
1 1965-69 average.
9 These funds support precipitation augmentation research, much of which may not have direct application to drought
alleviation.
11 Battan, Louis J.. "The Scientific Uncertainties: a Scientisl Responds." in William A.
Thomas (editor), "Legal and Scientific Uncertainties of Weather Modification." proceed-
ings of a symposium Convened at Duke University, .Mar. 11-12, 197©, by C e National Con-
ference of Lawyers and Scientists. Durham. N.C., Duke University Press. 1!)77. p. 20.
12 U.S Domestic Council. Environmental Resources Committee, Subcommittee on Climate
Change. "The Federal Rofe in Weather Modification," December i(->~r», p. 2.
u» Special Commission on Weather Modification. "Weather and Climate Modification,"
National Science Foundation. NSF 6G-3, Washington, D.C., Dec. 20, 1965, p. 7.
5
TIMELINESS
The modern period in weather modification is about three decades
old, dating from events in 1946, when Schaefer and Langmuir demon-
strated that a cloud of supercooled water droplets could be transformed
into ice crystals when seeded with dry ice. Activities and interests
among scientists, the commercial cloud seeders, and Government spon-
sors and policymakers have exhibited a nearly 10-year cyclic behavior
over the ensuing years. Each of the three decades since the late 1940's
has seen an initial burst of enthusiasm and activity in weather modi-
fication experiments and/or operations; a midcourse period of con-
troversy, reservations, and retrenchment; and a final period of
capability assessment and policy examination, with the issuance of
major Federal reports with comprehensive recommendations on a
future course.
The first such period ended with the publication of the final report
of the Advisory Committee on Weather Control in 1957.14 In 1959,
Dr. Robert Brode, then Associate Director of the National Science
Foundation, summarized the significance of that study in a 1959
congressional hearing :
For 4 years the Advisory Committee studied and evaluated public and private
cloud-seeding experiments and encouraged programs aimed at developing both
physical and statistical evaluation methods. The final report of the com-
mittee * * * for the first time placed before the American public a body of
available facts and a variety of views on the status of the science of cloud
physics and the techniques and practices of cloud seeding and weather modifica-
tion.15
The year 1966 was replete with Government weather modification
studies, major ones conducted by the National Academy of Sciences,
the Special Commission on Weather Modification of the National
Science Foundation, the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences, and the Legislative Reference Service of the Library
of Congress. During that year, or thereabouts, planning reports were
also produced by most of the Federal agencies with major weather
modification programs. The significance of that year of reevaluatiori
and the timeliness for congressional policy action were expressed by
Hartman in his report to the Congress :
It is especially important that a comprehensive review of weather modification
be undertaken by the Congress at this time, for a combination of circumstances
prevails that may not be duplicated for many years. For the first time since
1957 there now exists, in two reports prepared concurrently by the National
Academy of Sciences and a Special Commission on Weather Modification, created
by the National Science Foundation, a definitive appraisal of the entire scope
of this subject, the broad sweep of unsolved problems that are included, and
critical areas of public policy that require attention. There are currently before
the Congress several bills which address, for the first time since enactment of
Public Law 85-510. the question of the formal assignment of Federal authority
to undertake weather modification programs. And there is increasing demand
throughout the country for the benefits that weather modification may bring.16
14 F^tablishment of the Advisory Committee on Weather Control by the Congress and its
actJ^ties are discussed in following chapters on the history of weather modification and
on Federal activities, chs. 2 and 5, respectively. Recommendations of the final report are
summarized in ch. 6. Other renorts mentioned in the following paragraphs in this section
are also discussed and referenced in chs. 5 and 6. ■ \ - ..
15 U.S. Congress. House of Representatives. Committee on Science and Astronautics.
"Weather Modification." Hearing. Sfith Cong.. 1st sess., Feb. 16, 1959. Washington, JJ.L.,
U.S. Government Printing OfhYp 19^9. p 3. .t _ _
16 Hartman, Lawton M. "Weather Modification and Control.' Library of Comrress,
Legislative Reference Service. Apr. 27. 1966. Issued as a committee print by the Senate
Committee on Commerce. 89th Cone.. 2d sess., Senate Rept. No. 1139, Washington,
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966, p. 1.
6
Toward the close of the third decade, a number of policy studies and
reports appeared, starting in 1973 with a second major study by the
National Academy of Sciences, and including others by the U.S. Gen-
eral Accounting Office and by the U.S. Domestic Council. The major
study of this period was commissioned by the Congress when it enacted
Public Law 94-490, the National Weather Modification Policy Act of
1976, in October of 1976. By that law the Secretary of Commerce was
directed to conduct a study and to recommend the Federal policy and a
Federal research program in weather modification. That study was
conducted on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce by a Weather Modi-
fication Advisory Board, appointed by the Secretary, and the required
report will be transmitted to the Congress during 1978. The importance
of that act and its mandated study was assessed by Dr. Robert M.
White, former Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmos-
pheric Administration (NOAA), the Commerce Department agency
with administrative responsibilities and research programs in weather
modification :
The National Weather Modification Policy Act of 197C> * * * will influence
X( )AA to some degree during the next year, and its effect may have a large impact
on the agency and the Nation in future years. The comprehensive study of and
report on weather modification that will result from our implementation of this
act will provide guidance and recommendations to the President and the Congress
in the areas of policy, research, and utilization of this technology. We look to this
study and report as an opportunity to help set the future course of a controversial
science and technology with enormous potential for henefit to the Nation.17
Thus, conditions once more are ripe and the stage has been set, as in
1957 and again in 1966, for the Congress to act in establishing a defini-
tive Federal weather modification policy, one appropriate at least for
the next decade and perhaps even longer. Among other considerations,
such a policy would define the total role of the Federal Government,
including its management structure, its responsibilities for research
and development and for support operations, its authorities for regu-
lation and licensing, its obligation to develop international cooperation
in research and peaceful applications, and its function in the general
promotion of purposeful weather modification as an economically vi-
able and socially accepted technology. On the other hand, other factors,
such as constraints arising from public concern over spending, may
inhibit the development of such policy.
While some would argue that there exists no Federal policy, at least
one White House official, in response to a letter to the President, made
a statement of weather modification policy in 1975:
A considerable amount of careful thought and study has been devoted to the
subject of weather modification and what the Federal role and. in particular, the
role of various agencies should he in (his area. As a result of this study, we have
developed a general strategy for addressing weather modification efforts which
we believe provides for an appropriate level of coordination.
We believe that the agency which is charged with the responsibility for dealing
with a particular national problem should Ite given the latitude to seek the best
approach or solution to the problem. In some instances this may involve a form
of weather modification, while in other instances other approaches may be more
appropriate.
While we would certainly agree that some level of coordination of weather
modification research efforts is logical, we do not believe that a program under
w CJ.S. Congress, Souse of Representatives, Committee on Science and Technology. Sub*
committi d the EBaTlronmeal snd the Atmosphere. "Briefing «"i the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration." Hearings. 9.1th Cong., 1st sess., May 17. 18, 1977. Washing-
Jon. I'.S. Government Printing Ollice, 1977. i». 4-i5.
7
the direction of any one single agency's leadership is either necessary or desirable.
We have found from our study that the types of scientific research conducted by
agencies are substantially different in approach, techniques, and type of equip-
ment employed, depending on the particular weather phenomena being addressed.
Each type of weather modification requires a different form of program manage-
ment and there are few common threads which run along all programs.13
Presumably, there will be a resurgence of congressional interest in
weather modification policy during the first session of the 96th Con-
gress, when the aforementioned report from the Secretary of
Commerce has been reviewed and considered. In view of the recom-
mendations in numerous recent studies and the opinions of the Weather
Modification Advisory Board (the group of experts preparing the re-
port for the Secretary of Commerce) , it seems unlikely that any action
by the Congress would perpetuate the policy expounded in the White
House letter quoted above.
It is expected that this present report, intended as an overall review
of the subject of weather modification, will be valuable and timely dur-
ing the anticipated congressional deliberations.
DEFINITIONS AND SCOPE OF REPORT
In the broadest sense, weather modification refers to changes in
weather phenomena brought on purposefully or accidentally through
human activity. Weather effects stimulated unintentionally — such as
urban influences on rainfall or fogs produced by industrial com-
plexes— constitute what is usually termed inadvertent weather modifi-
cation. On the other hand, alterations to the weather which are
induced consciously or intentionally are called planned or advertent
weather modification. Such activities are intended to influence single
weather events and to occur over relatively short time spans, ranging
from a few hours in the case of clearing airport fog or seeding a
thunderstorm to perhaps a few days when attempts are made to re-
duce the severity of hurricane winds. Weather modification experi-
ments or operations can be initiated or stopped rather promptly, and
changes resulting from such activities are transient and generally
reversible within a matter of hours.
Climate modification, by contrast, encompasses changes of long-time
climatic variables, usually affecting larger areas and with some degree
of permanence, at least in the short term. Climatic changes are also
brought about by human intervention, and they might result from
either unintentional or planned activities. There are numerous ex-
amples of possible inadvertent climate modification; however, at-
tempts to alter climate purposefully are only speculative. The con-
cepts of inadvertent weather and climate modification are defined
more extensively and discussed fully in chapter 4 of this report.
The primary emphasis of this report is on intentional or planned
modification of weather events in the short term for the general bene-
fit of people, usually in a restricted locality and for a specific time.
Such benefit may accrue through increased agricultural productiv-
18 Ross, Norman E., Jr., letter of June 5, 1975. to Congressman Gilbert Gude. This letter
was the official White House response to a letter of April 25. 1975. from Congressmen
Giule and Donald M. Fraser and Senator Claiborne Pell, addressed to the President, urging
that a coordinated Federal program be initiated in the peaceful uses of weather modifica-
tion. The letter to the President, the replv from Mr. Ross, and comments by Congressman
Gude appeared in the Congressional Record for June 17. 1975, pp. 19201-19203. (This
statement from the Congressional Record appears in app. A.)
s
ity or other advantages accompanying augmentation of precipitation
or they may result from mitigation of effects of severe weather with
attendant decreases in losses of life or property. There are broader
implications as well, such as the general improvement of weather for
the betterment of man's physical environment for aesthetic and cul-
tural reasons as well as economic ones. The following recent definition
sums up succinctly all of these purposes :
Weather modification is the deliherate and mindful effort by men and women
to enhance the atmospheric environment, to aim the weather at human purposes.1"
The specific kinds of planned weather modification usually consid-
ered, and those which are discussed, in turn, in some detail in chapter
3, are the following:
Precipitation enhancement.
Hail suppression.
Fog dissipation.
Lightning suppression.
Mitigation of effects of severe storms.
Planned weather modification is usually considered in the context
of its net benefits to society at large. Nevertheless, it should be recog-
nized that, in particular instances, benefits to some segment of the
population may be accompanied by unintended injuries and costs,
which may be real or perceived, to other segments. There is yet an-
other aspect of advertent weather modification, which has engendered
much controversy, both in the United States and internationally, not
designed for the benefit of those directly affected — the use of weather
modification for hostile purposes such as a weapon of war. This aspect
is not a major consideration in this report, although there is some
discussion in chapters 5 and 10 of congressional concern about such use
of the technology, and in chapter 10 there is also a review of recent
efforts by the United Nations to develop a treaty barring hostile use
of weather modification.20
Following this introductory chapter, witli its summary of issues,
the second chapter sets the historical perspective for weather modi-
fication, concentrating primarily on activities in the United States to
about the year 1970, The third chapter attempts to review the scien-
tific background, the status of technology, and selected technical prob-
lems areas in planned weather modification; while chapter 4 contains
a discussion of weather and climate changes induced inadvertently by
man's activities or by natural phenomena.
The weather modification activities of the Federal Government —
those of the Congress and the administrative and program activities
of the executive branch agencies — are encompassed in chapter 5 ; and
the findings and recommendations of major policy studies, conducted
by or on behalf of the Federal Government, are summarized in chap-
ter 6. The seventh, eighth, and ninth chapters are concerned with
weather modification activities at the level of State and local govern-
ments, by private organizations, and in foreign countries, respectively.
111 Wc.it :'<m- Modification Advisory Hoard, "A TVS Policy to Enhance the Atmospheric
Environment," Oct. 21, 1!>77. A discussion paper, included with testimony of Harlan Cleve-
land, Chairman of the Advisory Hoard, in a congressional hearing: U.S. Congress. House
of Representatives. Committee on Science and Technology. Subcommittee on the Environ-
ment and the Atmosphere. Weather Modification. !).".th Cong., 1st sess., Oct. 2(5, 1J>77,
Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, H»77. p. 25.
211 Copies of the current official position of the I'.S. Department of Defense on weather
modification and of the draft TT.\ convention prohibiting hostile use of environmental
modification, respectively, are found in apps. B and C.
9
The increasingly important international problems related to weath-
er modification are addressed in chapter 10, while both domestic and
international legal aspects are discussed in chapter 11. Chapters 12
and 13, respectively, contain discussions on economic and ecological
aspects of this emerging technology.
The 20 appendixes to the report provide materials that are both sup-
plementary to textual discussions in the 13 chapters and intended
to be valuable sources of reference data. In particular, attention is
called to appendix D, which contains excerpts dealing with weather
modification from the statutes of the 29 States in which such activities
are in some way addressed by State law, and to appendix E, which
provides the names and affiliations of individuals within the 50 States
who are cognizant of weather modification activities and interests with-
in the respective States. The reader is referred to the table of contents
for the subjects of the remaining appendixes.
Summary or Issues in Planned Weather Modification
"The issues we now face in weather modification have roots in the
science and technology of the subject, but no less importantly in the
politics of Government agencies and congressional committees and in
public attitudes which grow out of a variety of historical, economic,
and sociological factors." 21 In this section there will be an identifica-
tion of critical issues which have limited development of weather
modification and which influence the ability to direct weather modifi-
cation in a socially responsible manner. The categories of issues do
not necessarily correspond with the subjects of succeeding chapters
dealing with various aspects of weather modification ; rather, they are
organized to focus on those specific areas of the subject where there
has been and there are likely to be problems and controversies which
impede the development and application of this technology.
The following sections examine technological, governmental, legal,
economic, social, international, and ecological issues. Since the primary
concern of this report is with the intentional, planned use of weather
modification for beneficial purposes, the issues summarized are those
involved with the development and use of this advertent technology.
Issues and recommendations for further research in the area of inad-
vertent weather modification are included in chapter 4, in which that
general subject is fully discussed.
TECHNOLOGICAL PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
In a recent discussion paper, the Weather Modification Advisory
Board summarized the state of weather modification by concluding
that "no one knows how to modify the weather very well, or on a very
large scale, or in many atmospheric conditions at all. The first require-
ment of a national policv is to learn more about the atmosphere it-
self." 22 Representative of the state of weather modification science
21Fleagle. Crutchfield, Johnson, and Abdo, "Weather Modification in the Public Inter-
est," 1973, p. 15. . . . .
22 Weather Modification Advisory Board. "A U.S. Policy To Enhance the Atmospheric
Environment." Oct. 21, 1977. This discussion paper was included with the testimony ot
Mr. Harlan Cleveland, Chairman of the Advisory Board, in a recent congressional hearing :
U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Science and Technology, Subcom-
mittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere. "Weather Modification. 9oth Cong., 1st
sess. Oct. 26, 1977, Washington, D.C., U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1977, p. 25.
10
and technology is the following commentary on the state of under-
standing in the case of precipitation enhancement, or rainmaking as it
is popularly called :
Today, despite the fact that modern techniques aimed at artificial stimulation
of rain rest upon sound physical principles, progress is still fairly slow. The
application of these principles is complicated by the overwhelming complexity
of atmosheric phenomena. It is the same dilemna that meteorologists face when
they attempt to predict weather. In both cases, predicting the evolution of
atmospheric processes is limited by insufficient knowledge of the effects produced
by the fairly well-known interactive mechanisms governing atmospheric phenom-
ena. Moreover, the temporal and spatial variability of atmospheric phenomena
presents an additional difficulty. Since any effects that are produced by artificial
intervention are always imposed upon already active natural processes, assess-
ment of the consequences becomes even more difficult.23
Grant recognizes the current progress and the magnitude of remain-
ing problems when he says that :
Important^and steady advances have been made in developing technology
for applied weather modification, but complexity of the problems and lack of
adequate research resources and commitment retard progress. Advances have
been made in training the needed specialists, in describing the natural and
treated cloud systems, and in developing methodology and tools for the necessary
research. Nevertheless, further efforts are required.24
Though it can be argued that progress in the development of weather
modification has been retarded by lack of commitment, ineffective
planning, and inadequate funding, there are specific scientific and tech-
nical problems and issues needing resolution which can be identified
beyond these management problems and the basic scientific problem
quoted above with respect to working with the atmosphere. Particular
technical problems and issues at various levels which continue to affect
both research and operational activities are listed below :
1. There is substantial diversity of opinion, even among informed
scientists, on the present state of technology for specific types of
weather modification and their readiness for application and with
regard to weather modification in general.-5
%2. There are many who view weather modification only as a drought-
relief measure, expecting water deficits to be quickly replenished
through its emergency use; however, during such periods weather
modification is limited by less frequent opportunities ; it should, in-
stead, be developed and promoted for its year-round use along with
other water management tools.-0
3. The design and analysis of weather modification experiments is
intimately related to the meteorological prediction problem, which
needs further research, since the evaluation of any attempt to modify
the atmosphere depends on a comparison between some weather pa-
rameter and an estimate of what would have happened naturally.
4. Many of the problems which restrict Understanding and predic-
tion of weather modification phenomena stem from imprecise knowl-
edge of fundamental cloud processes; the level of research in funda-
2:1 Dennis, Arnett S., and A. Ge^in. "Recommendations for Future Research in Weatlier
Modification," U.S. Department <»i" Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin-
istration, Environmental Research Laboratories. Boulder, Colo.. November 1077. p. VI.
-"Grant. "Scientific and Other Uncertainties of Weather .Modification," 1977. p. 17.
88 Sec table 2, ch. D. ">!>.
-• Silverman. Bernard A., "What Do We Need In Weather Modification?" In preprints
of the Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather .Modification, Oct. lO-l.'i,
1077, Champaign, 111., Boston, American Meteorological Society, 1977, p. 308.
II
mental cloud physics and cloud modeling has not kept pace with
weather modification activity.27
5. Progress in the area of weather modification evaluation meth-
odology has been slow, owing to the complexity of verification prob-
lems and to inadequate understanding of cloud physics and dynamics.
6. Most operational weather modification projects, usually for the
sake of economy or in the anticipation of achieving results faster and
in greater abundance, fail to include a satisfactory means for project
evaluation.
7. There are difficulties inherent in the design and evaluation of any
experiment or operation which is established to test the efficacy of
any weather modification technique, and such design requires the
inclusion of proper statistical methods.
8. In view of the highly varying background of natural weather
phenomena, statistical evaluation of seeding requires a sufficiently
long experimental period: many research projects just barely fail
to achieve significance and credibility because of early termination;
thus, there is a need for longer commitment for such projects, perhaps
5 to 10 years, to insure that meaningful results can be obtained.2S
9. There is a need to develop an ability to predict possible adverse
weather effects which might accompany modification of specific
weather phenomena : for example, the extent to which hail suppression
or diminishing hurricane winds might also reduce beneficial precipi-
tation, or the possibility of increasing hailfall or incidence of light-
ning from efforts to stimulate rainfall from cumulus clouds.29
10. The translation of cloud-seeding technologies demonstrated in
one area to another geographical area has been less than satisfactory;
this has been especially so in the case of convective cloud systems,
whose differences are complex and subtle and whose classification is
complicated and sometimes inconsistent.
11. There is increasing evidence that attempts to modify clouds
in a prescribed target area have also induced changes outside the
target area, resulting in the so-called downwind or extended area
effect : reasons for this phenomenon and means for reducing negative
results need investigation.
1*2. There is the possibility that cloud seeding in a given area and
during a given time period has led to residual or extended time effects
on weather phenomena in the target area beyond those planned from
the initial seeding.
13. The conduct of independent cloud-seeding operations in adjacent
locations or in the neighborhood of weather modification experiments
may cause contamination of the atmosphere so that experimental
results or estimates of operational success are biased.
14. There have been and continue to be conflicting claims as to
the reliability with which one can conduct cloud-seeding operations
so that the seeding agent is transported properly from the dispensing
device to the clouds or portions of the clouds one seeks to modify.
27 Hosier. C. L.. "Overt Weather Modification.*' Reviews of Geophysics and Space Phys-
ics, vol. 12. Xo. 3, August 1974, p. 526.
28 Simpson. Joanne, "What Weather Modification Needs." In preprints of the Sixth
Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification. Oct. 10-13, 1977. Cham-
paign. 111.. Boston. American Meteorological Society. 1977, p. 306.
29 Hosier, "Overt Weather Modification,'- 1974, p. 325.
12
15. There is need to develop, improve, and evaluate new and cur-
rently used cloud-seeding materials and to improve systems for deliv-
ery of these materials into the clouds.
16. There is need to improve the capability to measure concentra-
tions of background freezing nuclei and their increase through seed-
ing; there is poor agreement between measurements made with various
ice nucleus counters, and there is uncertainty that cloud chamber
measurements are applicable to real clouds.30
IT. In order to estimate amounts of fallen precipitation in weather
modification events, a combination of weather radar and raingage
network are often used; results from such measurement systems have
often been unsatisfactory owing to the quality of the radar and its
calibration, and to uncertainties of the radar-raingage intercalibration.
18. There is continuing need for research in establishing seedability
criteria ; that is, definition of physical cloud conditions when seeding
will be effective in increasing precipitation or in bringing about some
other desired weather change.
10. Mathematical models used to describe cloud processes or account
for interaction of cloud systems and larger scale weather systems
greatly oversimplify the real atmosphere; therefore, model research
must be coupled with field research.31
GOVERNMENTAL ISSUES
The basic problem which encompasses all governmental weather
modification issues revolves about the question of the respective roles,
if any, of the Federal, State, and local governments. Resolution of this
fundamental question puts into perspective the specific issues of where
m the several governmental levels, and to what extent, should goals be
set, policy established, research and/or operations supported, activities
regulated, and disputes settled. Part of this basic question includes
the role of the international community, considered in another section
on. international issues;32 the transnational character of weather modi-
fication may one day dictate the principal role to international orga-
nizations.
Role of the Federal Government
Because weather modification cannot be restricted by State bound-
aries and because the Federal Government has responsibilities for re-
source development and for reduction of losses from natural hazards,
few would argue that the Federal Government ought not to have some
interest and some purpose in development and possible use of weather
modification technolo<rv. The following broad and specific issues on
the role of the Federal Government in weather modification are among
those which may be considered in developing a Federal policy:
1. Should a maior policy analysis be conducted in an attempt to re-
late weather modification to the Xatioivs broad goals; that is, improv-
ing human health and the qualit v of life, maintaining national security,
providing sufficient energy supplies, enhancing environmental quality,
and the production of food and fiber? Barbara Farhar suggests that
such a study has not been, but ought to be. undertaken.33
™ Fbld.
m Fleagle et al., "Weather Modification in tUo Public interest." 197^. n St.
n= Sop n. 2&
"Farhar, Barbara C. "The Societal Imidieations of Weather Modification: a TCeview
of issues Toward m National Policy.*' Background paper prepared f«r the U.S. Department
of Commerce Weather ModinVatlonAdvisory Hoard, Mar. 1, 1977, p. 2.
13
2. Should the Federal Government commit itself to planned weather
modification as one of several priority national goals ? It can be argued
that such commitment is important since Federal program support and
political attitudes have an important overall influence on the develop -
ment and the eventual acceptance and application of this technology.
3. Is there a need to reexamine, define, and facilitate a well-balanced,
coordinated, and adequately funded Federal research and development
program in weather modification ? Many argue that the current Fed-
eral research program is fragmented and that the level of funding is
subcritical.
4. Is there a suitable Federal role in weather modification activities
beyond that of research and development — such as project evaluation
and demonstration and operational programs? If such programs are
advisable, how can they be identified, justified, and established ?
5. Should the practice of providing Federal grants or operational
services by Federal agencies to States for weather modification in times
of emergency be reexamined, and should procedures for providing such
grants and services be formalized ? It has been suggested that such as-
sistance in the past has been haphazard and has been provided after it
was too late to be of any practical benefit.
6. Should the organizational structure of the Federal Government
for weather modification be reexamined and reorganized ? If so, what
is the optimum agency structure for conducting the Federal research
program and other functions deemed to be appropriate for the Federal
Government?
7. TThat is the role of the Federal Government, if any, in regulation
of weather modification activities, including licensing, permitting,
notification, inspection, and reporting? If such a role is to be modified
or expanded, how should existing Federal laws and/or regulations be
modified ?
8. If all or any of the regulatory functions are deemed to be more ap-
propriate for the States than for the Federal Government, should the
Federal Government consider mandating minimum standards and
some uniformity among State laws and regulations?
9. Should the Federal Government attempt to develop a means ade-
quate for governing the issues of atmospheric water rights between
States, on Federal lands, and between the United States and neighbor-
ing countries ?
10. Where federally sponsored research or possible operational
weather modification projects occupy the same locale as local or
State projects, with the possibility of interproject contamination,
should a policy on project priorities be examined and established?
11. Should the Federal Government develop a policy with regard
to the military use of weather modification and the active pursuit of
international agreements for the peaceful uses of weather modifica-
tion? This has been identified as perhaps one of the most important
areas of Federal concern.34
12. Is there a need to examine and define the Federal responsibility
for disseminating information about the current state of weather
modication technology and about Federal policy, including the capa-
bility for providing technical assistance to the States and to others?
fS*Farhar Barbara C. "What r>o°s Weatber Modification Need"- In preprints of the
Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, Oct. 10-13, 1977,
Champaign. 111., Boston, American Meteorological Society, 1977, p. 299.
14
13. Should there be a continuing review of weather modification
technology capabilities so that Federal policy can be informed regard-
ing the readiness of technologies for export to foreign nations, with
provision of technical assistance where and when it seems feasible? 35
14. How does the principle of cooperative federalism apply to
weather modification research projects and possible operations carried
out within the States ? Should planning of projects with field activities
in particular States be done in consultation with the States, and should
cooperation with the States through joint funding and research efforts
be encouraged ?
15. What should be the role of the single Federal agency whose
activities are most likely to be affected significantly by weather modi-
fication technology and whose organization is best able to provide
advisory services to the States— the U.S. Department of Agriculture?
Among the several agencies involved in weather modification, the
Department of Agriculture has demonstrated least official interest
and lias not provided appreciable support to development of the
technology.36
Roles of State and local go vernments
State and local 37 governments are in man}' ways closer to the
public than the Federal Government — often as a result of more direct
contact and personal acquaintance with officials and through greater
actual or perceived control by the voters. Consequently, a number of
weather modification functions, for both reasons of practical effi-
ciency and social acceptance, may be better reserved for State and/or
local implementation. Since weather phenomena and weather modifica-
tion operations cannot be restricted by State boundaries or by bound-
aries within States, however, many functions cannot be carried out
in isolation. Moreover, because of the economy in conducting research
nnd development on a common basis — and perhaps performing other
functions as well — through a single governmental entity, such as an
agency or agencies of the Federal Government, it may be neither
feasible nor wise for State governments (even less for local jurisdic-
tions) to carry out all activities.
Thus, there are activities which might best be reserved for the States
(and possibly for local jurisdictions within States), and those which
more properly belong to the Federal Government. In the previous
l ist of issues on the role of the Federal Government, there was allusion
to a number of functions which might, wholly or in part, be the re-
sponsibility of either Federal or State governments; most of these
will not be repeated here. Issues and problems concerned primarily
with State and local government functions are listed below:
1. State weather modification laws. Where they exist, are nonuni-
form in their requirements and specifications for licensing, permitting,
inspection, reporting, liabilities, and penalties for violations. More-
over, some State laws and policies favor weather modification, while
ot hers oppose 1 he technology.
2. Authorities for funding operational and research projects with-
in States and local jurisdictions within States, through public funds
[bid.
:" Changnon, "The Federal Role in Weather Modification." |p. 11.
37 ,fLocal" bere refers broadly to any jurisdiction below the State level : it could laelucto
cities, townships, counties, groups of counties, water districts, or any other organized area
Operating under public authority.
15
or through special tax assessments, vary widely and, except in a few
States, do not exist.
3. Decisionmaking procedures for public officials appear to be often
lacking; these could be established and clarified, especially as the pos-
sibility of more widespread application of weather modification tech-
nology approaches.
4. Many public officials, usually not trained in scientific and en-
gineering skills, often do not understand weather modification tech-
nology, its benefits, and its potential negative consequences. Some
training of such officials could contribute to their making wise de-
cisions on the use of the technology, even without complete informa-
tion on which to base such decisions.
5. Many weather modification decisions have had strong political
overtones, with some legislators and other public officials expressing
their views or casting their votes allegedly on the basis of political
expediency rather than on the basis of present or potential societal
benefits.
6. State and local authorities may need to provide for the education
of the general public on the rudiments of weather modification, on its
economic benefits and disbenefits. and on other societal aspects.
7. To keep communication channels open, mechanisms such as pub-
lic hearings could be established to receive comments, criticisms, and
general public sentiments on weather modification projects from in-
dividual citizens and from various interest groups.
8. Criteria and mechanisms have not been established for compen-
sating those individuals or groups within States who might be eco-
nomically injured from weather modification operations.
9. Questions of water rights within States, as well as between States,
have not been addressed and/or resolved in a uniform manner.
LEGAL ISSUES
Legal issues in weather modification are complex and unsettled.
They can be discussed in at least four broad categories :
1. Private rights in the clouds ;
2. Liability for weather modification ;
3. Interstate legal issues ; and
4. International legal issues,38
The body of law on weather modification is slight, and existing case
law offers few guidelines to determine these issues. It is often neces-
sary, therefore, to analogize weather modification issues to more set-
tled areas of law such as those pertaining to water distribution.
Private rights in the clouds
The following issues regarding private rights in the clouds may be
asked :
Are there any private rights in the clouds or in the water which
may be acquired from them ?
Does a landowner have any particular rights in atmospheric
water ?
Does a weather modifier have rights in atmospheric water \
^Questions on regulation or control of weather modification activities through licensing
and permitting, while of a basic legal nature, are related to important administrative func-
tions and are dealt with under issues concerned with Federal and State activities.
1(3
Some State statutes reserve the ownership or right to use atmospheric
water to the State.39
There is no general statutory determination of ownership of atmos-
pheric water and there is no well-developed body of case law. Conse-
quently, analogies to the following general common law doctrines may
be helpful, but each has its own disadvantages when applied to weather
modification :
1. The doctrine of natural rights, basically a protection of the land-
owner's right to use his land in its natural condition (i.e., precipita-
tion is essential to use of the land as are air, sunlight, and the soil
itself).
2. The ad coelum doctrine which states that whoever owns the land
ought also to own all the space above it to an indefinite extent.
3. The doctrine of riparian rights, by which the one owning land
which abuts a watercourse may make reasonable use of the writer, sub-
ject to similar rights of others whose lands abut the watercourse.
4. The doctrine of appropriation, which gives priority of right based
on actual use of the water.
5. The two main doctrines of ownership in the case of oil and gas
(considered, like water, to be "fugitive and migratory" substances) ;
that is, (a) the non-ownership theory, by which no one owns the oil and
gas until it is produced and anyone may capture them if able to do so;
and (b) the ownership-in-place theory, by which the landowner has the
same interest in oil and gas as in solid minerals contained in his land.
6. The concept of "developed water," that is, water that would not
be available or would be lost were it not for man's improvements.
7. The concept of "imported water," that is, water brought from one
watershed to another.
Liability for weather modification
Issues of liability for damage may arise when drought, flooding, or
other severe weather phenomena occur following attempts to modify
the weather. Such issues include causation as well as nuisance, strict
liability, trespass, and negligence. Other issues which could arise relate
to pollution of the air or water through introduction of artificial nu-
cleants such as silver iodide, into the environment. While statutes of
10 States discuss weather modification liability, there is much varia-
tion among the specific provisions of the laws in those States.40
Before any case can be made for weather modification liability
based upon causation it must be proven that the adverse weather con-
ditions were indeed brought about by the weather modifier, a very
heavy burden of proof for the plaintiff. In fact, the scientific uncer-
tainties of weather modi Heal ion are such that no one has ever been able
to establish causation of damage through these activities. As weal her
modification technology is improved, however, the specter of a host of
liability issues is expected to emerge as evidence for causation becomes
more plausible.
While the general defense of the weather modifier against liability
charges is that causation has not been established, he may also use as
further defense the arguments based upon immunity, privilege, con-
sent , and waste.
• Sec p. 4.">o, ch. 1 1. and app. n.
M Sec discussion p. 453 in ch. 11 and app. D.
17
Interstate legal issues
When weather modification activities conducted in one State affect
another State as well, significant issues may arise. The following-
problem categories are examples of some generally unresolved inter-
state issues in weather modification :
1. There may be the claim that cloud seeding in one State has removed
from the clouds water which should have fallen in a second State or
that excessive flooding in a neighboring State has resulted from seed-
ing in a State upwind.
2. Operation of cloud-seeding equipment near the border in one State
may violate local or State ordinances which restrict or prohibit weather
modification in an adjacent State, or such operations may conflict with
regulations for licensing or permitting of activities within the bor-
dering State.
Some States have attempted to resolve these issues through specific
legislation and through informal bilateral agreements.41 Another ap-
proach would be through interstate compact, though such compacts re-
quire the consent of Congress. No compacts specifically concerned with
weather modification currently exist, though some existing compacts
allocating waters in interstate streams may be applicable to weather
modification.
International legal issues
Because atmospheric processes operate independent of national
borders, weather modification is inherently of international concern.
International legal issues have similarities to domestic interstate activi-
ties and dangers. The following serious international questions, which
have arisen in conjunction with a developing capability to modify the
weather, have been identified by Orfield : 42
Do countries have the right to take unilateral action in all
weather modification activities?
What liability might a country incur for its weather modifica-
tion operations which [might] destroy life and property in a
foreign State?
On what theory could and should that State base its claim ?
The primary international legal issue regarding weather modifica-
tion is that of liability for transnational injury or damage, which could
conceivably result from any of the following situations :
(1) injury or damage in another nation caused by weather
modification activities executed within the United States;
(2) injury or damage in another nation caused by weather
modification activities executed in that nation or a third nation by
the United States or a citizen of the United States ;
(3) injury or damage in another nation caused by weather
modification activities executed in an area not subject to the juris-
diction of any nation (e.g., over the high seas), by the United
States or a citizen thereof ; and
(4) injury or damage to an alien or an alien's property within
the United States caused by weather modification activities exe-
cuted within the United States.
41 See discussion p. 457 in ch. 11 and app. D.
42 Orfield, Michael B.. "Weather Genesis and Weather Neutralization: a New Approach
to Weather Modification," California Western International Law Journal, vol. 6, no. 2,
spring 1976, p. 414.
34-S57— 79 4
18
Whereas domestic weather modification law is confused and unset-
tled, international law in this area is barely in the formative stage. In
time, ramifications of weather modification may lead to major interna-
tionl controversy.43
ECONOMIC ISSUES
The potential for long-term economic gains through weather modi-
fication cannot be denied ; however, current, economic analyses are tenu-
ous in view of present uncertainty of the technology and the complex
nature of attendant legal and economic problems. Meaningful economic
evaluation of weather modification activities is thus limited to special,
localized cases, such as the dispersal of cold fog at airports, where bene-
fit-cost ratios greater than 5 to 1 have been realized through savings in
delayed or diverted traffic. Various estimated costs for increased pre-
cipitation through cloud seeding range from $1.50 to $2.50 per acre-
foot in the western United States.
fsy/es complicating economic analyses of weather modification
Costs of most weather modification operations are usually relatively
small and are normally believed to be only a fraction of the benefits
obtained through such operations. However, if all the benefits and all
the costs are considered, benefit-cost ratios may be diminished. While
direct costs and benefits from weather modification are reasonably
obvious, indirect costs and benefits are elusive and require further study
of sociological, legal, and ecological implications.
In analyzing benefit-cost ratios, some of the following considerations
need to be examined :
Weather modification benefits must be considered in terms of
the costs for achieving the same objectives as increased precipita-
tion, e.g., through importation of water, modified use of agricul-
tural chemicals, or introduction of improved plant strains.
Costs for weather modification operations are so low in compari-
son with other agricultural investments that farmers may gamble
in spending the 5 to 20 cents per acre for operations designed to
increase rainfall or suppress hail in order to increase yield per
acre, even though the results of the weather modification opera-
tions may be doubtful.
Atmospheric conditions associated with prolonged droughts are
not conducive to success in increasing precipitation; however,
under these conditions, it is likely that increased expenditures
may be made for operations which offer little hope of economic
return.
Increased precipitation, obtained through a weather modifica-
tion program sponsored and funded by a group of farmers', can
also benefit other farmers who have not shared in the costs; thus,
the benefit-cost ratio to those participating in the program is
higher than it need be if all share in its costs.
As weather modification technology develops and programs be-
come more1 sophisticated', increased costs for equipment and labor
will increase direct costs to clients: indirect costs resulting from
increased State license and permit fees and liability insurance for
operators will probably also be passed on to the customer.
I: s»'c ch. 10 on International aspects and i>. 4<;s. ch. 11; on International legal aspects of
wpa i her modification.
19
The sophistication of future programs will likely incur addi-
tional costs for design, evaluation, and program information ac-
tivities, along with supporting meteorological prediction services;
these costs will be paid from public funds or by private clients, in
either case reducing the overall benefit-cost ratios.
Ultimate costs for compensation to those incurring disbenefits
from weather modification operations will offset overall benefits
and thus reduce bene fit -cost ratios.
Weather modification and conflicting interests
There are numerous cases of both real and perceived economic losses
which one or more sectors of the public may suff er while another group
is seeking economic advantage through some form of weather modi-
fication. Overall benefits from weather modification are accordingly
reduced when net gains are computed from such instances of mixed
economic advantages and disadvantages. Benefits to the parties seek-
ing economic gain through weather modification will be directly re-
duced at such time when mechanisms are established for compensating
those who have suffered losses. The following are some examples of
such conflicting situations :
Successful suppression of hail may be valuable in reducing crop
damage for orchardists while other agricultural crops may suffer
f rom decrease of rain concomitant with the hail decrease.
Additional rainy days may be of considerable value to farmers
during their growing season but may be detrimental to the finan-
cial success of outdoor recreational enterprises.
Increased snowpack from orographic cloud seeding may be
beneficial to agricultural and hydroelectric power interests but
increases the costs for maintaining free passage over highways
and railroads in mountainous areas.
Successful abatement of winds from severe storms, such as those
of hurricanes, may result in decreased precipitation necessary for
agriculture in nearby coastal regions or may redistribute the ad-
verse storm effects, so that one coastal area is benefitted at the ex-
pense of others.
SOCIAL ISSUES
It has been said that "weather modification is a means toward so-
cially desired ends, not an end in itself. It is one potential tool in a set
of possible societal adjustments to the vagaries of the weather. Iden-
tifying when, where, and how to use this tool, once it is scientifically
established, is the primary need in weather modification." 44 It is likely
that, in the final analysis, the ultimate decisions on whether weather
modification should and will be used in any given instance or will be
adopted more generally as national or State programs depends on
social acceptance of this tool, no matter how well the tool itself has
been perfected. That this is increasingly the case has been Suggested by
numerous examples in recent years. Recently Silverman said :
Weather modification, whether it he research or operations, will not progress
wisely, or perhaps at all, unless it is considered in a context that includes everyone
M Fnrhar. Barbara C. "What Does Weather Modification Need ?" In preprints of the Sixth
Conference on rianr.pd and Inadvertent Weather Modification. October 10-13, 1977. Cham-
paign* 111. Boston. American Meteorological Society, 1977. p. 296.
20
that may be affected. We must develop and provide a new image of weather
modification.45
Regardless of net economic benefits, a program is hard to justify
when it produces obvious social losses as well as gains.
Research in the social science of weather modification has not kept
pace with the development of the technology, slow as that has been.
In time, this failure may be a serious constraint on further develop-
ment and on its ultimate application. In the past, organized opposition
has been very effective in retarding research experiments and in cur-
tailing operational cloud-seeding programs. Thus, there is need for an
expanded effort in understanding public behavior toward weather
modification and for developing educational programs and effective
decisionmaking processes to insure intelligent public involvement in
eventual application of the technology.
Social issues discussed in this section are those which relate to public
behavior and public response to weather modification, while societal
issues are generally considered to include economic, legal, and other
nontechnical issues as Veil as the social ones. These other aspects of
societal issues were discussed in preceding sections. In the subsections
to follow there are summaries of social implications of weather modifi-
cation, the need for public education, and the problem of
decisionmaking.
Social factors
It has been said that social factors are perhaps the most elusive and
difficult weather modification externalities to evaluate since such fac-
tors impinge on the vast and complex area of human values and at-
titudes.46 Fleagle, et al., identified the following important social
implications of weather modification, which would presumably be
taken into account in formulation of policies : 47
1. The individuals and groups to be affected, positively or negatively, by tlie
project must be defined. An operation beneficial to one party may actually barm
another. Or an aggrieved party may hold the operation responsible * * ::: for
damage * * * which might occur at the same time or following the modification.
2. The impact of a contemplated weather modification effort on the genera!
well-being of society and the environment as a whole must be evaluated. Con-
sideration should be given to conservationists, outdoor societies, and other
citizens and groups representing various interests who presently tend to ques-
tion any policies aimed at changes in the physical environment. It is reasonable
and prudent to assume that, as weather modification operations expand, question-
ing and opposition by the public will become more vocal.
3. Consideration must be given to the general mode of human behavior in
response to innovation. There are cases where local residents, perceiving a cause
and effect relationship between economic losses from severe weather and nearby
weather modification operations, have continued to protest, and even to threaten
violence, after all operations bave been suspended.
4. The uniqueness and complexity of certain weather modification operations
must be acknowledged, and special attention should be given to their social and
legal implications. The cases of hurricanes and tornadoes are especially perti-
nent. Alteration of a few degrees in the path of a hurricane may result in its
missing a certain area * * * and ravaging * * * instead, a different one. The decision
on whether such an operation is justified can reasonably be made only at the
highest level, and would need to be based on the substantial scientific finding
thai the anticipated damages would be loss than those originally predicted h td
the hurricane been allowed to follow its course.
1 b Silverman, Bernard A. "What Do We Need in Weather Modification?" In preprints of
tli<' Sixth Conference on Planned and [nadvertenl Weather Modification, October 10—13,
litTT. Champaign, ill.. Boston, American Meteorological Society. u»77. p. 310.
ia Flengle, Crutchfleld, Johnson, and Abdo. "Weather Modification in the Public Interest."
1074. p. :',7-38.
*• Ibid., p. 38-40.
21
5. Attention must be given to alternatives in considering a given weather
modification proposal. The public may prefer some other solution to an attempt
at weather tampering which may be regarded as predictable and risky. Further-
more, alternative policies may tend to be comfortable extensions of existing
policies, or improvements on them, thus avoiding the public suspicion of inno-
vation. In an area such as weather modification, where so many uncertainties
exist, and where the determination or assigning of liability and responsibility
are far from having been perfected, public opposition will surely be aroused.
Any alternative plan or combination of plans will have its own social effects,
however, and it is the overall impact of an alternative plan and the adverse
effects of not carrying out such a plan which, in the final analysis, should guide
decisions on alternative action.
6. Finally, it is important to recognize that the benefits from a weather modi-
fication program may depend upon the ability and readiness of individuals
to change their modes of activity. The history of agricultural extension work
in the United States suggests that this can be done successfully, but only with
some time lag, and at a substantial cost. Social research studies suggest that
public perception of flood, earthquake, and storm hazards is astonishingly casual.
Need for public education on weather modification
The previous listing of social implications of weather modification
was significantly replete with issues derived from basic human atti-
tudes. To a large extent these attitudes have their origin in lack of in-
formation, misconceptions, and even concerted efforts to misinform by
organized groups which are antagonistic to weather modification. As
capabilities to modify weather expand and applications are more wide-
spread, it would seem probable that this information gap would also
widen if there are no explicit attempts to remedy the situation. "At the
very least," according to Fleagle, et al., "a large-scale continuing pro-
gram of education (and perhaps some compulsion) will be required if
the potential social gains from weather modification are to be realized
in fact," 48 Whether such educational programs are mounted by the
States or by some agency of the Federal Government is an issue of
jurisdiction and would likely depend on whether the Federal Govern-
ment or the States has eventual responsibility for management of op-
erational weather modification programs. Information might also be
provided privately by consumer groups, professional organizations,
the Aveather modification industry, or the media.
It is likely that educational programs would be most effective if a
variety of practical approaches are employed, including use of the
news media, publication of pamphlets at a semitechnical level, semi-
nars and hearings, and even formal classes. Probably the latter cate-
gories would be most appropriate for civic groups, Government offi-
cials, businessmen, or other interests who are likely to be directly
affected by contemplated operations.
The following list of situations are examples of public lack of under-
standing which could, at least in part, be remedied through proper
educational approaches :
There is much apprehension over claims of potential d^rger of a
long-lasting nature on climate, which could supposedly result
from both inadvertent and planned modification of the weather,
with little insight to distinguish between the causes and the scales
of the effects.
There have been extravagant claims, propagated through ig-
norance or by deliberate distortion by antagonistic groups, about
48 Ibid., p. 40.
22
the damaging effects of cloud seeding on ecological systems, human
lien 1th. and air and water quality.
The controversies between opposing groups of scientists on the
efficacy of weather modification technologies and between scien-
tists and commercial operators on the readiness of these technolo-
gies for application has engendered a mood of skepticism and
even mistrust of weather modification on the part of a public
which is largely uninformed on technical matters.
The public has often been misinformed by popular news media,
whose reporters seek to exploit the spectacular in popular weather
modification "stories" and who, themselves usually uninformed in
technical aspects of the subject, tend to oversimplify and distort
the facts associated with a rather complex science and technology.
There has been an organized effort on the part of groups opposed
to weather modification to mount an educational program which
runs counter to the objectives of informing the public about the
potential benefits of a socially acceptable technology of weather
modification.
Portions of the public have acquired a negative impression that
meteorologists and Government officials concerned with weather
modification are irresponsible as a result of past use. or perceived
present and future use. of the technology as a weapon of war.
Lack of information to the public has sometimes resulted in
citizen anger when it is discovered that a seeding project has been
going on in their area for some time without their having been
informed of it.
Decisionmaking
"The nature of wenther processes and the current knowledge about
them require that most human decisions as to weather modification
must be made in the face of uncertainty. This imposes special re-
straints on public agencies and it increases the difficulty of predict-
ing how individual farmers, manufacturers, and others who are
directly affected by weather would respond to changes in leather
Characteristics.5' 49 The situation since 1965 when this statement was
made has changed little with resrard to predictability of weather
processes and their modification. There has also been little progress
toward developing decisionmaking processes which can be applied,
should the need arise, on whether or not weather modification should
be emploved.
A number of studies on social attitudes indicate that the preference
of most cit izens is that decisionmaking in such areas as use or restraint
from use of weather modification should be at the local level. owim>-
to the feeling that citizens' rights and property are best protected
when decisions are made bv officials over whom they have the most
direct; control. Farhar savs that evidence suggests that one important
condition for public acceptance of weather modification technology
is public involvement in the decision process, especially in civic
derisions.™ Procedures must then be developed for enabling {peal
49 Special Commission on Wcnther Modification. "Weather and Climate Modification."
NRF or, irto.~. p uc.
» F.-irlisir. Bar nun) P. "The Pnldie Derides Al<ont Weather Modification."' Environment
and Behavior, vol. 9. No. September 1 077. p. .".07.
23
officials, probably not technically trained, to make such decisions
intelligently. Such decisions must be based both on information
received from Federal or State teclmical advisers and on the opinions
of local citizens and interest groups.
INTERNATIONAL ISSUES
International agreements regarding weather modification experi-
ments and operations have been very limited. There exists a United
States-Canada agreement, which requires consultation and notifica-
tion of the other country when there is the possibility that weather
modification activities of one country could affect areas across the
border.51 Earlier understandings were reached between the United
States and Canada concerning experiments over the Great Lakes and
with the IJnited Kingdom in connection with hurricane modification
research in the Atlantic.52 Recent attempts to reach agreement with
the Governments of Japan and the People's Republic of China for
U.S. experiments in the Far East on modification of typhoons were
unsuccessful, though such research was encouraged by the Philip-
pines. There is current intention to reach an agreement with Mexico
on hurricane research in the eastern Pacific off that nation's coast.
During 1976, 25 nations reported to the World Meteorological Orga-
nization that they had conducted weather modification activities.53
There have been two principal international activities, dealing with
somewhat different aspects of weather modification, in recent years.
One of these is the preparation and design of a cooperative experi-
ment under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organization,
called the Precipitation Enhancement Experiment (PEP) ; while the
other is the development of a convention by the United Nations on
the prohibition of hostile use of environmental modification.54
The following international considerations on research and opera-
tional weather modification activities can be identified :
1. There is a common perception of a need to insure that the current
high level of cooperation which exists in the international community
with regard to more general meteorological research and weather re-
porting will be extended to development and peaceful uses of planned
weather modification.
2. There is now no body of international law which can be applied to
the potentially serious international questions of weather modification,
such as liability or ownership of atmospheric water resources.55
3. Past use by the United States, and speculated current or future
use by various countries, of weather modification as a weapon have
raised suspicions as to the possible intent in developing advertent
weather modification technology.
4. There have been charges that weather modification research activi-
ties were used to divert severe weather conditions away from the
r,t The United States-Canada agreement on weather modification is reproduced in nop. F.
52 Taubenfeld, Howard J., "National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976 ; Interna-
tional Agreements." Background paper for use of the U.S. Department of Commerce
Weather Modification Advisory Board, March 1977, p. 13.
53 See table 1, ch. 9, p. 409.
54 These activities and other international aspects of weather modification are discussed
in ch. 10.
55 See previous section on legal issues, p. 17.
24
United States at the expense of other countries or that such activities
have resulted in damage to the environment in those countries.56
5. As in domestic research projects, there are allegations of insuffi-
cient funding over periods of time too short to achieve significant
results in the case of internationally sponsored experiments; in par-
ticular, many scientists feel that a means should be devised to insure
that the planned Precipitation Enhancement Project (PEP) receives
adequate continuous support.
6. Other nations should be consulted with regard to any planned
weather modification activities by the United States which might con-
ceivably affect, or be perceived to affect, those countries.
ECOLOGICAL ISSUES
The body of research on ecological effects of weather modification
is limited but significantly greater than it was a decade ago. It is
still true that much remains unknown about ecological effects of
changes to weather and climate.
Economically significant weather modification will always have an
eventual ecological effect, although appearance of that effect may be
hidden or delayed by system resilience and/or confused by system
complexity. It may never be possible to predict well the ecological
effects of weather modification; however, the more precisely the
weather modifier can specify the effects his activities will produce in
terms of average percentage change in precipitation (or other vari-
ables), expected seasonal distribution of the induced change, expected
year-to-year distribution of the change, and changes in relative form
of precipitation, the more precise can be the ecologist's prediction of
possible ecological effects.
Ecological effects will result from moderate weather-related shifts
in rates of reproduction, growth, and mortality of plants and animals;
they will rarely be sudden or catastrophic. Accordingly, weather modi-
fied ions which occur with regularly over time are the ones to which
biological communities will react. Adjustments of plant and animal
communities will usually occur more slowly in regions of highly vari-
able weather than in those with more uniform conditions. Deliberate
weather modification is likely to have greater ecological impact in
semiarid systems and less impact in humid ones. Since precipitation
augmentation, for example, would have the greatest potential for eco-
nomic value and is, therefore, likely to have its greatest potential ap-
plication in such areas, the ecological impacts in transition areas will
be of particular concern.
Although widespread cloud seeding could result in local, temporary
increases in concentrations of silver (from the most commonly used
seeding agent, silver iodide), approaching the natural quantities in
surface waters, the exchange rates would probably be an order of
magnitude Lower than the natural rates. Even in localized areas of
precipital ion management, it appears I hat exchange rates will be many
orders of magnitude smaller than those adversely affecting plants and
soils. Further research is required, however, especially as other poten-
tial seeding agents are introduced.
m por example tbere were charges that attempts to mitigate severe effects of Hurricane
Fifl in 15>75 caused devastat ion to Honduras. :i charge which the United Nt;ites officially
denied, since no hurricanes had been seeded under Project Stormfury since 1971.
CHAPTER 2
HISTORY OF WEATHER MODIFICATION
(By Robert E. Morrison, Specialist in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research
Division, Congressional Research Service)
Introduction
The history of the desire to control the weather can be traced to
antiquity. Throughout the ages man has sought to alleviate droughts or
to allay other severe weather conditions which have adversely affected
him by means of magic, supplication, pseudoscientific procedures such
as creating noises, and the more on less scientifically based techniques
of recent times.
The expansion in research and operational weather modification
projects has increased dramatically since World War II; nevertheless,
activities predating this period are of interest and have also provided
the roots for many of the developments of the "modern" period. In a
1966 reprt for the Congress on weather modification, Lawton Hart-
man stated three reasons why a review of the history of the subject
can be valuable: (1) Weather modification is considerably older than
is commonly recognized, and failure to consider this fact can lead to a
distorted view of current problems and progress. (2) Weather modi-
fication has not developed as an isolated and independent field of re-
search, but for over a century has been parallel to and related to
progress in understanding weather processes generally. (3) Earlier
experiences in weather modification may not have been very different
from contemporary experiences in such matters as experimental de-
sign, evaluation of results, partially successful projects, and efforts to
base experiments on established scientific principles.1
Hartman found that the history of weather modification can be
conveniently divided into five partially overlapping periods.2 He refers
to these as (1) a prescientific period (prior to about 1839); (2) an
early scientific period (extending approximately from 1839 through
1891) ; (3) a period during which elements of the scientific framework
were established (from about 1875 to 1933) ; (4) the period of the
early cloud-seeding experiments (1921 to 1946) ; and (5) the modern
period, beginning with the work of Langmuir, Schaefer, and Vonne-
gut (since 1946). This same organization is adopted in discussions
below ; however, the four earlier periods are collected into one section,
while the more significant history of the extensive activities of the
post-1946 period are treated separately.
1 Hartman, Lawton M., "History of Weather Modification. " In U.S. Congress, Senate
Committee on Commerce "Weather Modification and Control." Washington. D.C U.S.
Government Printing Oflice, 1966 (89th Cong., 2d sess.. Senate Rept. No. 1139: prepared
by the Legislative Reference Service, the Library of Congress, at the request of Warren G.
Maemn«on) , p. 11.
2 Ibid.
(25)
26
History or Weather Modification Prior to 1946
PRESCIENTIFIC PERIOD
From ancient times through the early 19th century, and even since,
there have been reported observations which led many to believe that
rainfall could be induced from such phenomena as great noises and
extensive fires. Plutarch is reported to have stated, "It is a matter of
current observation that extraordinary rains pretty generally fall
after great battles/' 3 Following the invention of gunpowder, the fre-
quency of such claims and the conviction of those espousing this
hypothesis increased greatly. Many cases were cited where rain fell
shortly after large battles, A practical use of this phenomenon was re-
ported to have occurred in the memoirs of Benvenuto Cellini when, in
1539 on the occasion of a procession in Rome, he averted an impending
rainstorm by firing artillery in the direction of the clouds, "which had
already begun to drop their moisture." 4
William Humphreys jDOsed a plausible explanation for the appar-
ently high correlation between such weather events and preceding
battles. He noted that plans were usually made and battles fought in
good weather, so that after the battle in the temperate regions of
Europe or North America, rain will often occur in accordance with
the natural 3- to 5-day periodicity for such events.5 Even in modern
times there was the conviction that local and global weather had been
adversely affected after the explosion of the first nuclear weapons and
the various subsequent tests in the Pacific and elsewhere.0 Despite
statements of the U.S. Weather Bureau and others pointing out the
fallacious reasoning, such notions became widespread and persistent.7
In addition to these somewhat rational though unscientific obser-
vations, many of which were accompanied by testimony of reliable
witnesses, there had been, and there still exist in some primitive cul-
tures, superstitions and magical practices that accompany weather
phenomena and attempts to induce changes to the weather. Daniel
Halacy relates a number of such superstitiouslike procedures which
have been invoked in attempts to bring rain to crops during a drought
or to change the1 weather in some other way so as to be of particular
benefit to man : 8
Primitive rainmakers would often use various intuitive gestures, such as
sprinkling water on the soil that they wanted the heavens to douse, Mowing
mouthfuls of water into the air like rain or mist, hammering on drums to inu-
la re thunder, or throwing firebrands into the air to simulate lightning.
Women would carry water at night to the field and pour it out to coax the
skies to do likewise.
American Indians blew water from special pipes in imitation of the rainfall.
It was believed that frogs came down in the rain because many were seen
following rain : therefore, frogs were hung from trees so that the heavens would
pour down rain upon them.
Sometimes children were buried up to their necks in the parched ground and
then cried for rain, their tears providing the imitative magic.
Ward, R. !>«• <\. "Artificial Rain : a Review of the Subject to the Close of lSSft." Amor-
lean Meteorological Journal; vol. s. May 1891-Aprtl *S92, p. 484.
* Ibid., n. 408.
s Humphreys. William -1 . "Rain Making and Other Weather Vagaries." Baltimore, The
Williams and Wilkins Co.. 11*20. p. 31,
"Byers, Horace i:.. 'History of Weather Modification." In Wilnot N. Hess (editor),
"Weather and Climate Modification," New York. Wiley, 1!)74, p. 4.
~ T'.id
« Halacy, Daniel S., Jr., "The Weather Changers," New York. Harper & Row. 1908. pp.
27
In China, huge paper dragons were part of religious festivals to bring rain;
if- drought persisted, the dragon was angrily torn to bits.
North American Indians roasted young women from enemy tribes over a slow
fire, then killed them with arrows before eating their hearts and burying their
remains in the fields they wanted irrigated with rainfall.
Scottish witches conjured up the wind by beating a stone three times with a
rag dipped in water, among intonations like those of characters in a Shake-
spearean play.
New Guinea natives used wind stones upon which they tapped with a stick,
the force of the blow bringing anything from a zephyr to a hurricane.
Pregnant women in Greenland were thought to be able to go outdoors, take a
breath, and exhale it indoors to calm a storm.
In Scandinavian countries witches sold knotted bits of string and cloth which,
supposedly, contained the wind ; untying one knot at sea would produce a mod-
erate wind, two a gale, and three a violent storm.
Australian bushmen thought that they could delay the Sun by putting a clod
of dirt in the fork of a tree at just the height of the Sun, or hasten its departure
by blowing sand after it.
Bells have been thought to prevent hail, lightning, and windstorms, and some-
times they are still rung today for this purpose.
EARLY SCIENTIFIC PERIOD
James P. Espy was a 19th century American meteorologist known
especially for his development of a theon^ of storms based on convec-
tion. Recognizing that a necessary condition for rainfall is the
formation of clouds by condensation of water vapor from rising air,
Espy considered that rain could well be induced artificially when air
is forced to rise as a result of great fires, reviving a belief of the pre-
.scientific era but using scientific rationale. In the National Gazette in
Philadelphia of April 5, 1839, he said :
From principles here established by experiment, and afterward confirmed by
observation, it follows, that if a large body of air is made to ascend in a column,
a large cloud will be generated and that that cloud will contain in itself a self-
sustaining power, which may move from the place over which it was formed, and
cause the air over which it passes, to rise up into it, and thus form more cloud
and rain, until the rain may become more general.8
If these principles are just, when the air is in a favorable state, the bursting
out of a volcano ought to produce rain ; and such is known to be the fact ; and
I have abundant documents in my possession to prove it.
So, under very favorable conditions, the bursting out of great fires ought to
produce rain ; and I have many facts in my possession rendering it highly
probable, if not certain, that great rains have sometimes been produced by great
fires.10
Later in the same article Espy stated that :
From these remarkable facts above, I think it will be acknowledged that there
is some connection between great fires and rains other than mere coincidence.
But now. when it is demonstrated by the most decisive evidence, the evidence
of experiment, that air, in ascending into the atmosphere in a column, as it must
do over a great fire, will cool by diminished pressure, so much that it will begin
to condense its vapor into cloud.11
Espy postulated three mechanisms which could prevent great fires
from providing rain at all times when they occur: (1) If there is a
current of air at some height, it sweeps away the uprushing current
of air; (2) the dew-point may be too low to produce rain at all: and
(3) there may be an upper stratum of air so light that the rising
9 Espy. Tames P.. "Artificial Rains." National Gazette. Philadelphia. Apr. 5, lSf!9. Re-
printed in James P. Espy, "Philosophy of Storms," Boston. Little & Brown. 1841. pd.
493-494.
10 Ibid., p. 494.
11 Ibid., p. 496.
28
column may not be able to rise far enough into it to cause rain.12 He
proposed an experiment in which he would set fire to a "large mass
of combustibles," which would be ready for the right circumstances
and at a time of drought. He added : "Soon after the fire commences,
I will expect to see clouds begin to form * * *. I will expect to see
this cloud rapidly increase in size, if its top is not swept off by a
current of air at a considerable distance abov^e the Earth, until it
becomes so lofty as to rain.'- 13
For over a decade Espy served as an adviser to the Congress on
meteorological problems. He proposed in 1850 what is perhaps the first
Fedora! project for large-scale weather modification. His plan included
amassing large quantities of timber in the Western States along a
600- to 700-mile north-south line, to be set on fire simultaneously at
regular T-day intervals. He believed that this fire could have started
a "rain of great length" traveling toward the East, not breaking up
until reaching "far over the Atlantic Ocean; that it will rain over
the whole country east^of the place of beginning." The cost of this
experiment would "not amount to half a cent a year to each individual
in the United States." 14 Congress did not endorse the proposal for
reasons which are unknown: however. Fleagle speculates that perhaps
this failure was due to the fact that Congress had not yet accustomed
itself to appropriating funds for scientific enterprises.15
There was continuing controversy over whether or not fire could
cause increased rainfall. In an article which appeared in Nature in
1871, J. K. Laughton stated that, "The idea that large fires do, in some
way, bring on rain, is very old; but it was, I believe, for the first time
stated as a fact and explained on scientific grounds by the late Pro-
fessor Espy." 10 Laughton cited instances where burning brush in hot,
dry weather did not result in any rainfall, and he concluded that :
Large fires, explosions, battles, and earthquakes do tend to cause atmospheric
disturbance, and especially to induce a fall of rain ; but that for the tendency to
produce effect, it is necessary that other conditions should be suitable. With
regard to storms said to have been caused by some of these agencies, the evidence
is still more unsatisfactory ; and, in our present ignorance of the cause of storms
generally, is quite insufficient to compel us to attribute any one particular gale,
extending probably over a wide area, to some very limited and comparatively
insignificant disturbance.17
The 1871 Chicago fire also aroused interest, many believing that the
fire was stopped by the rainfall which it had initiated. Ward cites a
telegram of the time sent to London which read :
This fire was chiefly checked on the third or fourth day by the heavy and con-
tinuous downpour of rain, which it is conjectured is partly due to the great atmos-
pheric disturbances which such an extensive lire would cause, especially wben we
are told that the season just previous to the outbreak of the fire had been par-
ticularly dry."
u Ibid.
1 ■ I 'id., p. 400.
« Espy, James P., "Second Reporl on Meteorology to the Secretary of the Navy." U.S.
Senate. Executive Doctlmetats; No. 89, vol. 11, ."{1st Cong., 1st Bess. Washington, Wm. M
Belt 1850. p. 20.
us Fleagle. Robert O.. "Background and Present status of Weather Modification." In
Robert (i. Flea pie (editor). "Weather Modification: Science and Public Policy." University
of w ah inert on Press, Seattle 1968, p. 7.
"' Lautrhton. J K., "Can Weather lie Influenced bv Artificial Means?" Nature, Feb. 10.
1871 i. :•(»(;
17 Ibid., p. 307.
« Reported in Ward. "Artificial Rain : a Review of the Subject to the Close of 1889," 1*02.
pp. 480-400.
29
On the other hand, Prof. I. A. Lapham, speaking of the Chicago fire,
contradicted the previous account, saying :
During all this time — 24 hours of conflagration — no rain was seen to fall, nor
did any rain fall until 4 o'clock the next morning ; and this was not a very con-
siderable downpour, but only a gentle rain, that extended over a large district of
country, differing in no respect from the usual rains. It was not until 4 days
afterward that anything like a heavy rain occurred. It is, therefore, quite certain
that this case cannot be referred to as an example of the production of rain by a
great fire.19
Lapham goes on to say that, "The case neither confirms nor dis-
proves the Espian theory, and we may still believe the well-authenti-
cated cases where, under favorable circumstances of very moist air and
absence of wind, rain has been produced by very large fires." 20
Prof. John Trowbridge of Harvard reported in 1872 on his experi-
ments in which he investigated the influence of flares on atmospheric
electricity. Noting that the normal atmospheric state is positive and
that clearing weather is often preceded by a change from negative to
positive charge, he suggested that perhaps large fires may influence the
production of rain by changing the electrical state of the atmosphere,
since, in his tests, his flame tended "to reduce the positive charge of
electricity which generally characterizes the air of fine weather." 21 He
concluded by saying: "The state of our knowledge, however, in regard
to the part that electricity plays in atmospheric changes is very meager.
The question of the truth of the popular belief that great fires are fol-
lowed by rain still remains unanswered." 22
Meanwhile, H. C. Russel, president of the Royal Society of South
Wales and government astronomer, attempted to dispel the ideas that
both cannonading and great fires could be used to produce rain. He
hypothesized that, if fire were to have such an effect, rain should arrive
within 48 hours following the fire. Reviewing the records of 42 large
fires (including two explosions) covering a 21-year period, Russel
concluded that there was not one instance in which rain followed
within 48 hours as an evident consequence of the fire. He further cal-
culated that to get increased rainfall of 60 percent over a land surface
of 52,000 square feet at Sidney would require 9 million tons of coal per
day, in an effort to show what magnitude of energy expenditure was
necessary and how futile such an attempt would be.23
Toward the latter part of the 19th century there were a number of
ideas and devices invented for producing rain artificially. In 1880
David Ruggles of Virginia patented what he said was "a new and use-
ful mode of producing rain or precipitating rainfalls from rainclouds,
for the purpose of sustaining vegetation and for sanitary purposes."
His plan included a scheme by which balloons carrying explosives were
sent up into the air, the explosives to be detonated in the upper air "by
electric currents." 24
19 Lanham, I. A.. "The Great Fires of 1871 in the Northwest." The Journal of the Frank-
lin Institute, vol. 64, No. 1. July 1872, pp. 46-47.
20 IMd., p. 47.
21 Trowlirirtge, John, "Great Fires and Rain-storms." The Popular Science Monthly, vol. 2,
December 1872. p. 211.
22 Tbid.
23 Report of an address bv H. C. Russel was given in Science, vol. 3, No. 55, Feb. 22. 1884,
pp. 229-230.
24 "New Method of Precipitating Rain Falls," Scientific American, vol. 43, Aug. 14. 1S80,
p. 106.
30
G. H. Bell suggested a rainmaking device, consisting of a hollow
tower 1.500 feet high, through which air was to be blown into the
atmosphere, the volume of the up-rushing air to be increased through
use of a s}^stem of tubes around the tower. The inventer consider that
the same system could be used to prevent rain, by reversing the blower
so that the descending air might "annihilate" the clouds.25
Still other schemes and contrivances were proposed and patented.
J. B. Atwater was granted a patent in 1887 for a scheme to dissipate
tornadoes by detonating an explosive charge in their centers, and an-
other was granted to Louis Gathman in 1891 for seeding clouds for rain
by exploding a shell containing "liquid carbonic acid gas" at cloud
height,20 the latter concept antedating by over 50 years the more recent
carbon dioxide seeding projects.
There continued to be adherents to the idea that explosions could
cause rainfall. This belief was reinforced by "evidence" of such a con-
nection in a book by Edward Powers, called "War and the Weather,"
published in 1871 and 1890 editions, in which the author recounted the
instances in which rain followed battles, mostly from North America
and Europe during the 19th century.27
Powers was convinced that :
The idea that rain can be produced by human agency, though sufficiently
startling, is not one which, in this age of progress, ought to be considered as
impossible of practical realization. Aside from its connection with the supersti-
tions of certain savage tribes, it is an opinion of comparatively recent origin, and
is one which cannot be regarded as belonging, in any degree, to a certain class of
notions which prevail among the unthinking; * * * on the contrary, it is one
which is confined principally to those who are accustomed to draw conclusions
only from adequate premises, and * * * founded on facts which have come under
their own observation.28
In tones somewhat reminding us of those urging a greater Federal
research effort in recent years, Powers proposed that experiments be
undertaken for economic benefit :
Judging from the letters which I have received since commencing in 1870 an
attempt to bring forward the subject of rains produced by cannon tiring. I believe
that the country would regard with interest some experiments in the matter, and
would not begrudge the expense, even if they should prove unsuccessful in leading
to a practical use of the principle under discussion. In some matters connected
wTith science, the Government has justly considered that an expenditure of public
funds was calculated to be of public benefit: but where, in anything of tiie kind
it. has ever undertaken, has there been so promising a field for such actions as
here?20
Powers, upon examining the records of many battles, said :
Let us proceed to facts — facts not one of which, perhaps, would be of a in-
significance if it stood alone and unsupported by the others; but which, taken
in the aggregate, furnish the strongest evidence that heavy artillery firing
has an influence on the weather and tends to bring rain. 11
Perhaps influenced by the arguments of Powers and others, in
1890 the U.S. Congress had become so much interested in and gained
Another Ka in Controller." Scientific American, vol. 4:{. Aug, 21. 1SSO. p 11M.
26 Harrington, Mark W.. "Weather-making, Ancient and Modern," Smithsonian Institu-
tion Annual Report, to July 1894, pp. 249 1270.
-'■ I'owers. IMward. "War and the Weather." Delavan. Wis.. 10. Powers. 1890, revised
edition, 202 pp. (An earlier edition was published in Chicago in 1871. Incidentally, the
plates for the first edition were deal roved in the Chicago lire, and I'owers did not have an
opportunity to complete his revision until 1890. )
-* Ihid.. p. 5.
■ Ihid.. p. 143.
* Ihid., p. 11.
31
such faith in the possibility of weather modification that funds
we re appropriated to support experiments to be carried out under
the auspices of the Forestry Division of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture. The initial $2?0p0 appropriated was increased first to
$7,000, and finally to $10,000. in the first federally sponsored weather
modification project. Of the total appropriated. $9,000 was to be
spent on held experiments. Gen. Robert St. George Dyrenforth was
selected by the Department of Agriculture to direct these tests, hav-
ing earlier conducted tests near Utiea, X.Y., and Washington, D.C..
using balloons and rockets carrying explosives. The principal ex-
periments were executed near Midland, Tex., using a variety of ex-
plosive devices, detonated singly and in volleys, both on the ground
and in the air.31
According to an interesting account by Samuel Hopkins Adam-.
Dyrenforth arrived in Texas on a hot day in August 1891 with a
company of 80 workers, including "* * * chemists, weather observers,
balloon operators, electricians, kitefiiers, gunners, minelayers, sap-
pers, engineers, and laborers * * * together with some disinterested
scientists, who were to serve as reporters." 32 Adams discusses the ap-
paratus which Dyrenforth took with him :
The expedition's equipment was impressive. There were 68 balloons of from 10
to 12 feet in diameter, and one of 20 feet — all to be hlled with an explosive mixture
of hydrogen and oxygen. There were also sixty 6-inch mortars, made of pipe, and
several tons of rackarock (a terrifying blend of potassium chlorate and nitro-
benzol that, was the general's favorite "explodent" >, dynamite, and blasting
powder. Finally, there were the makings of a hundred kites, to be assembled on the
scene, and sent up with sticks of dynamite lashed to them. The congressional
$9,000 fell considerably short of sufficing for so elaborate an outfit, but expectant
Texans chipped in with liberal contributions and the railroads helped out by sup-
plying free transportation.1"
Dyrenforth carried out five series of trials during 1891 and 1892 :
one period of sustained cannonading coincided with a heavy down-
pour, and the apparent connection provided support to the credi-
bility of many people, who accepted the hypotheses as confirmed.
Dyrenforth gave optimistic and promising reports of his results:
however, meterologists and other scientists were critical of his work.
It does not appear that the Forestry Division was fervently ad-
vocating the research program for which it had responsibility. In
1891, Bernhard E. Fernow, Chief of the Division of Forestry, re-
ported to the Secretary of Agriculture his sentiments regarding the
experiments which were to be conducted in the coming summer, with
a caution reminiscent of the concerns of many meterologists of the
1970°s :
The theories in regard to the causes of storms, and especially their local and
temporal distribution, are still incomplete and unsatisfactory. It can by no means
be claimed that we know all the causes, much less their precise action in precipi-
tation. It would, therefore, be presumptuous to deny any possible effects of ex-
plosions ; but so far as we now understand the forces and methods in precipitating
rain, there seems to be no reasonable ground for the expectation that they will be
effective. We may say, then, that at this stage of meteorological knowledge we
are not justified in expecting any results from trials as proposed for the predtre-
tion of artificial rainfall, and that it were better to increase this knowledge first
31 Fleagle. "Background and Present Status of Weather Modification." 1968, pp. 7-8.
32 Adams. Samuel Hopkins. The New Yorker. Oct. 9, 1952, pp. 93-100.
*> Ibid., i«. !.'4.
32
by simple laboratory investigations and experiments preliminary to experiment
on a larger scale.34
In 1893, the Secretary of Agriculture asked for no more public funds
for support of this project.35
Fleagle tells about the use of 36 "hail cannons" by Albert Stiger, a
town burgomaster, on the hills surrounding his district in Austria in
1896:
Tbe hail cannon consisted of a vertically pointing three-centimeter mortar
above which was suspended the smokestack of a steam locomotive. This device
not only produced an appalling sound, but also created a smoke ring a meter or
more in diameter which ascended at about one hundred feet per second and
produced a singing note lasting about ten seconds. Initial successes were impres-
sive, and the hail cannon was widely and rapidly copied throughout central
Europe. Accidental injuries and deaths were numerous, and in 1902 an inter ua-
tional conference was called by the Austrian government to assess the effects of
the hail cannon. The conference proposed two tests, one in Austria and one in
Italy, the results of which thoroughly discredited the device.36
Though unsuccessful, the work of Dyrenforth and others had in-
spired belief in the possibilities of drought alleviation such that a
number of unscrupulous "rainmakers" were able to capitalize on the
situation. Halacy gives an account of a famous rainmaker of the early
20th century, Charles Warren Hatfield, who operated for about 10
years in the western United States. With a 25-foot platform and a
secret device for dispensing chemicals, he claimed to create rain over
extensive areas. In 1916. Hatfield contracted with the city of San Diego
to alleviate drought conditions and was to be paid $1,000 for each inch
of rain produced. When 20 inches of rain coincidentally fell nearby,
the resulting floods destroyed a dam, killed 17 people, and produced
millions of dollars damage. Hatfield, faced with a choice of assuming
financial responsibility for the lawsuits or leaving the city without pay,
chose the latter.37
One of Hatfield's accomplices was a colorful racetrack reporter from
Xew York, who met and joined Hatfield in California in 1912, named
James Stuart Aloysius MacDonald, alias Colonel Stingo, "the Honest
Rainmaker." Over his half -century career as a writer, mostly for var-
ious horseracing journals. MacDonald reportedly involved himself in
various schemes for quick profit, including weather changing projects
on both the west and east coasts. Contracts with clients were drawn up
with terms for remuneration that resembled very much the language
of success or failure at the racetrack. By his own admission, Mac-
Donald based his odds for success on past weather data for a given
area, which he obtained from records of the U.S. Weather Bureau or
the Xew York Public Library.88 MacDonald, or Colonel Stingo, was
the inspiration for a Broadway play called "The Rainmaker" which
opened in 1954.
DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTIFIC FUNDAMENTALS
Espy's L839 proposal for an experiment on the production of con-
vection currents and water vapor condensation at high altitudes was
■A Fernow, Rernhard E.. in report to Jeremiah McClain Rusk. Secretary of Agriculture,
1891, an reported in Ward, "Artificial Rain ; a Review of the Subject to the Close of 1889."
1882. p. 492.
• livers. "History of Weather .Modification." 1 1*74. p. 5.
38 Fleajcle. "Rackpronnd and Present Status of Weather Modification," 1968, p. 9.
:t7 Halacy, "The Weather Changers," 1968, pp. 68 69.
38 Liebling, A. J., "Profiles," The New Yorker, Sept. 20, 1902, pp. 43-71.
33
based on sound physical principles. Since knowledge of atmospheric
processes was expanding and unfolding rapidly at the time, Hartman
reminds us that the limited usefulness of Espy's weather modification
concepts should not be ascribed to faulty logic, but rather to the primi-
tive understanding at the time of the complex processes in precipita-
tion, many of which are still not understood satisfactorily.39
The understanding which meteorologists have today about precipi-
tation has been learned slowly and sometimes painfull}^, and, while
many of the discoveries haA'e resulted from 20th century research,
some important findings of the latter part of the 19th century are
fundamental to these processes. Important results were discovered in
1875 by Coulier in France on foreign contaminant particles in the
normal atmosphere, and quantitative measurements of the concentra-
tions of these particles were achieved by Aitken in 1879. These events
established a basis for explaining the fundamental possibility for
occurrence of precipitation. Earlier, it had been learned that high
supersaturations were required for the formation of water droplets.40
Aitken was the first to imply that there are two types of nuclei, those
with an affinity for water vapor (hygroscopic particles) and nuclei
that require some degree of supersaturation in order to serve as con-
densation centers. The Swedish chemist-meteorologists of the 1920's
developed a theory of condensation on hygroscopic nuclei and showed
the importance of sea-salt particles. In the 1930's in Germany and the
United Kingdom, a series of measurements were conducted on the
numbers and sizes of condensation nuclei by Landsberg, Judge, and
Wright. Data from measurements near Frankfurt, augmented sub-
sequently by results from other parts of the world, have been adopted
as the standard of reference for condensation nuclei worldwide.41
At the beginning of the 1930's important aspects of cloud phys'
were not yet understood. In particular, the importance of thp ic,ri phu
to precipitation was not yet clarified, though, ever since the turn of
the century meteorologists were aware that water droplets were abun-
dantly present in clouds whose temperatures were well below the freez-
ing point. Little was known about the microphysics of nucleation of ice
crystals in clouds ; however, it had been noted that rains fell only after
visible glaeiation of the upper parts of the clouds. Understanding
of these processes was essential before scientific seeding of clouds for
weather modification could be pursued rationally. In 1933 Tor Berg-er-
on presented and promulgated his now famous theory on the initiation
of precipitation in clouds containing a mixture of liquid and ice.
W. Findeisen expanded on Bergeron's ideas and published a clearer
statement of the theory in 1938 ; consequently, the concept is generally
known as the Bergeron-Findeisen theory.42 in his investigation of the
formation of ice crystals, Findeisen was of the opinion that they crys-
talled directly from the vapor (that is, by sublimation) rather than
freezing from droplets. He also conjectured that quartz crystals might
be the nuclei responsible for this process and even foresaw that the
mechanism might be initiated artificially by introducing suitable
nuclei.43
33 Hartman, "Weather Modification and Control," 1966, p. 13.
40 Ibid.
41 Bvers. "History of Weather Modification," 1974, p. 7.
42 Ibid., p. 8.
*» Ibid., pp. 8-9.
34-857—79 5
34
Findeisen stated emphatically that rain of any importance must
originate in the form of snow or hail, though Bergeron had admitted
the occurrence of warm rain in the tropics. Though many meteorolo-
gists doubted that the ice crystal process was an absolute requirement
for rain, they had been unable to collect evidence from aircraft obser-
vations. In Germany aerological evidence was obtained on the growth
of rain drops by the collision-coalescence process in "warm" clouds,
but the papers on this work were published in 1940, and World War
II restricted communication of the results to meteorologists world-
wide. Meanwhile in the United States, papers were published on the
theory of the warm rain process. In 1938, Houghton showed that pre-
cipitation could be started by either the Bergeron process or by the
collision-coalescence process. He noted that drops could be formed by
condensation on "giant" hygroscopic nuclei present in the air and that
growth of droplets to raindrop size was possible through collision.
G. C Simpson elucidated further on condensation and precipitation
processes in 1941, disagreeing with Findeiseivs rejection of "warm"
rain formation by the collision-coalescence process.44
EARLY CLOUD-SEEDIXG EXPERIMENTS
Starting about 1920 and continuing for about two decades until
the outbreak of World War II, there were a number of experiments
and operations intended to produce rain or modify the weather in
some other way. Although some of these activities were pusued in a
scientific manner, others were less so and were directed at producing
immediate results; all of these projects lacked the benefit of the funda-
mental knowledge of precipitation processes that was to be gained
later during this same period, the discoveries of which are discussed
in the preceding subsection. Various schemes during this period in-
cluded the dispensing of materials such as dust, electrified sand, dry
ice, liquid air, and various chemicals, and even the old idea that explo-
sions can bring rain. Field tests were conducted in the United States,
Germany, the Netherlands^ and the Soviet Union.
Byers tells .about the experimental work of Dr. E. Leon Chaffee,
professor of physics at Harvard, who became interested in the possi-
bility of making cloud particles coalesce by sprinkling electrically
charged sand over the clouds :
Dr. Chaffee became enthusiastic about the idea and developed in his laboratory
a nozzle tor charging sand and dispersing it from an airplane. The nozzle could
deliver sand grains having surface gradients of the order of 1.000 V/ein. Flight
experiments were carried out in August and Seprcmber of 1024 at Aberdeen,
Md.. with an airplane scattering the sand particles in the clear air above clouds
having tops at n.ooo to 10,000 feet. Dr. Chaffee reported "success*' in the reverse
sense, in that several clouds were observed to dissipate after treatment. The tests
were well publicized in newspapers and scientific news journals, and this author,
then a freshman at the University of California, recalls that his physics pro-
fessors were enthusiastic about the idea. Chaffee's results probably would not
endure the type of statistical scrutiny to which experiments of this kind are
subject today.43
Chaffee considered several trials successful, since clouds were dis-
sipated after being sprayed with the charged sand. It has been pointed
" Ibid . p. 9.
« Ibid., p. 5.
35
out, however, in view of the much greater experience in recent years,
that scientists must be extremely cautious in ascribing success in such
experiments, when the evidence is based largely on visual obser-
vations.4'1
In the Netherlands, August Veraart successfully produced rain by
seeding clouds with dry ice from a small aircraft in 1930. This was
16 years before the work at General Electric in the United States, when
clouds were also seeded with dry ice, initiating the modern period in
the history of weather modification. Since Veraart probably did not
understand the mechanism involved in the precipitation process which
he triggered, ho did not realize that the dry ice was effective in develop-
ment of ice crystals by cooling supercooled clouds, and his success was
likely only a coincidence. Byers observes that Veraart's vague con-
cepts on changing the thermal structure of clouds, modifying tem-
perature inversions, and creating electrical effects were not accepted,
however, by the scientific community.47 He claimed to be a true rain-
maker and made wide, sweeping claims of his successes. He died in
19o*2, a year before Bergeron's theory appeared, not aware of the theo-
retical basis for his work.48
Partly successful experiments on the dissipation of fog were con-
ducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the 1930s,
under the direction of Henry G. Houghton. At an airfield near Round
Hill, Mass., fog was cleared using sprays of water-absorbing solutions,
particularly calcium chloride, as well as fine particles of dry hygro-
scopic material. Results of these experiments, which predated some of
the present-day foo- dispersal attempts bv some 30 vears, were reported
in 1938. 19
Weather Modification Sixce 1946
CHRONOLOGY
The following chronology of "critical events" relating to weather
modification policy, compiled by Fleagle. unfolds only some of the
major events and activity periods which have occurred since the his-
toric discoveries of 1946 : 50
1946 : Schaefer demonstrated seeding: with dry ice.
1947 : Vonnegut demonstrated seeding with silver iodide.
1947-55 : Irving Langmuir advertised weather modifieaton widely and aggres-
sively.
1947- 53: General Electric field experiments ("Cirrus") extended evidence
that clouds can he deliherately modified, but failed to demonstrate large effects.
1948- 50: Weather Bureau Cloud Physics Project on cumulus and stratiform
clouds resulted in conservative estimate of effects.
1948-52 : Commercial operations grew to cover 10 percent of United States.
1950: Report of Panel on Meteorology of Defense Department's Research and
Development Board (Haurwitz, Chairman) was adverse to Langmuir's claims.
1953: Public Law 83-256 established President's Advisory Committee on
Weather Control.
45 McDonald. James E.. "An Historical Note on an Early Cloud-Modification Experiment.
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol. 42. No. 3, March 1961, p. 19o.
47 Byers. "History of Weather Modification." 1947. p. 6.
48 Hartman. "Weather Modification and Control." 1966. p. 15. , , „
» Houghton. Henrr G.. and W. H. Radford. "On the Local Dissipation of Natural bog.
Papers in Physical Oceanography and Meteorology. Massachusetts Institute of Technology
and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, vol. 6, No. 3. Cambridge and Woods Hole, Mass.,
October 1938, 63 pp. , „ - .. „ „ .
50 Fleagle. Robert G . "An Analysis of Federal Policies in \\ eather Modification. Back-
ground paper prepared for use by the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification
Advisory Board. Seattle. Wash., March 1977. pp. 3-5.
36
1953-54: "Petterssen" Advisory Committee organized field tests on storm sys-
tems, convective clouds, and cold and warm fog (supported by the Office of
Naval Research, the Air Force, the Army Signal Corps, and the Weather
Bureau). These statistically controlled experiments yielded results which have
been substantially unchanged in subsequent tests.
1957: Report of Advisory Committee (Orville, Chairman) concluded that tests
showed 15 percent increase in orographic winter precipitation.
1957 : Major cut in research support across the board by Defense Department
sends major perturbation through research structure.
195S: Public Law 85-510 assigned lead agency responsibility to the National
Science Foundation (NSF).
1959: Commercial operations had diminished to cover about one percent of
the United States.
1961 : First hurricane seeding under Project Stormfury.
1961 : Bureau of Reclamation authorized by Congress to conduct research in
weather modification.
1961 : RAND report on weather modification emphasized complexity of atmos-
pheric processes and interrelation of modification and prediction.
1962-70: Randomized field experiments established magnitude of orographic
effects.
1964: Preliminary report of National Academy of Sciences/Committee on
Atmospheric Sciences (NAS/CAS) roused anger of private operators and stimu-
lated the evaluation of operational data.
1964-present : Department of the Interior pushed the case for operational seed-
ing to augment water supplies.
1966: NAS/CAS report 1S50 laid the basis for expanded Federal programs.
1966 : Report of NSF Special Commission on Weather Modification and an NSF
symposium called attention to social, economic, and legal aspects.
1966: Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS) report
f Newell, Chairman) proposed expanded Federal support to $90 million by 1970.
1966- 68 : Efforts of the Departments of Commerce and Interior to gain lead
agency status were unsuccessful.
1967: ICAS recommended that Commerce be designated as lead agency.
1967: S. 2916, assigning lead agency responsibility to the Department of Com-
merce : passed the Senate but did not become law.
1967- 72 : Military operational programs conducted in Vietnam.
1968: Public Law 90-407 removed the NSF mandate as lead agency.
1968 : Detrimental effects of acid rain reported from Sweden.
1969: Public Law 91-190 (National Environmental Policy Act) required im-
pact statements.
1970; Massachusetts Institute of Technology Study of Critical Environmental
Problems called attention to inadvertent effects on climate.
1970 : Stratospheric contamination by SST's suggested.
1971 : Departments of Commerce and Interior carried out operational programs
in Oklahoma and Florida.
1971 : Public Law 92-205 required filing of reports of non-Federal weather
modification activities with the Department of Commerce.
1971 : International Study of Man's Impact on Climate raised this issue to inter-
national level.
1971 : NAS/CAS report on priorities for the 1970's emphasized need for atten-
tion to management and policy problems of weather modification.
1971: Federal Council for Science and Technology approved seven national
projects under various lead agencies.
1971-72: First technological assessments of weather modification projects are
favorable to operational programs.
1971-74 : Climate impact assessment program ( CTAP) of Department of Trans-
portation indicates potentially serious consequences of large SST fleet but sug-
gests ways to ameliorate the problem.
1972: Failure of Soviet wheat crop and drought in Sahel emphasized critical
need for understanding climate and the value of effective weather modification.
1973: Weather modification budget reduced by impoundment from $25.4 million
to $20.2 million.
1973 : Five national projects deferred or terminated.
1973: NAS/CAS report on weather and climate modification confirmed earlier
conclusions and recommended lead agency status for NOAA.
37
1974 : Stratospheric contamination by freon reported.
1974 : Domestic Council organized panels in climate change and weather
modification.
1974 : General Accounting Office report on weather modification criticized
weather modification program and pointed to need for lead agency.
1974 : Defense Department released information on operations in Vietnam.
1974 : The United States and the U.S.S.R. agreed to a joint statement intended
"to overcome the dangers of the use of environmental modification techniques for
military purposes."
1975 : World Meteorological Organization Executive Committee proposed cumu-
lus experiment perhaps in Africa or Iran.
1975 : Department of Transportation CIAP report indicated that a fleet of 500
SST's would deplete ozone significantly, but suggested that cleaner engines could
be developed.
1976: Chinese disapproval resulted in abandoning plans for Stormfury in the
western Pacific.
1976 : Hearings held on three weather modification bills by Senate Commerce
Committee.
1976: The National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-
859) enacted requiring study of weather modification.
1977 : Exceptionally dry winter in the west stimulates State operational pro-
grams intended to increase mountain snowpack.
Since the completion of Fleagle's list above in March 1977, at least
three other activities of equivalent significance ought to be noted :
1977 : The U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board
established in April 1977 and initiated a major study on a recommended national
policy and Federal program of research in weather modification, in accordance
with requirements to be fulfilled by the Secretary of Commerce under Public Law
94-490, the National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976.
1977 : The United Nations General Assembly approved a treaty banning environ-
mental modification activities for hostile purposes on May 18, 1977 ; and the treaty
opened for signature by the member nations.
1978 : The Report of the Commerce Department's Weather Modification Advi-
sory Board transmitted through the Secretary of Commerce to the Congress.
The history of the modern period of weather modification which
follows is essentially that of the two decades following the monumental
discoveries of 1946. An excellent account of the history of weather
modification, which emphasizes this period, has been prepared by
Byers.51 This work has been very helpful in some of the material to
follow and is referenced frequently. The late 1960's and the 1970's are
so recent that events during this period are discussed in various sections
of the report as ongoing activities or events leading to current activities
in weather modification research programs, operations, and policy
decisions rather than in this chapter as an integral part of an updated
history of the subject.
LAXGMUIR, SCIIAEFER, AND VOXXEGUT
The modern era of scientific weather modification begaai in 1946,
when a group of scientists at the General Electric Co. demonstrated
that, through "seeding," a cloud of supercooled water droplets could
be transformed into ice crystals and precipitation could be induced.
These were not traditional meteorologists, though their leader. Dr.
Irving Langmuir, was a famous physicist and Nobel laureate. He and
his assistant, Vincent J. Schaefer, had been working for 3 years on
cloud physics research, however, in which they were studying particle
sizes, precipitation static, and icing. Their field research was carried on
Byers, "History of Weather Modification," 1974, pp. 3-44.
38
at the summit of Mt. Washington., X.H.. where they observed super-
cooled clouds which often turned into snowstorms.52
In an attempt to simulate field conditions. Schaefer contrived a
laboratory setup using a home freezer lined with black velvet, with a
light mounted so as to illuminate ice crystals that might happen to
form in the box. Breathing into the box, whose temperature was about
— 23° C, produced fog but no ice crystals, even when various sub-
stances— including sand, volcanic dust, sulfur, graphite, talc, and
salt — were dropped in as possible sublimation nuclei.53 On July 12.
19-16, Schaefer wanted to lower the freezer temperature somewhat, so
he inserted a large piece of dry ice. and. in an instant, the air was
full of millions of ice crystals. He discovered that even the tiniest
piece of dry ice produced the same etfect. In fact, dry ice had no
direct effect on the supercooled cloud; producing an air temperature
below - 39° C was critical.54
In his paper on the laboratory experiments, published in the No-
vember 15, 1946. issues of^Sciencev Schaefer stated :
It is planned to attempt in the near future a large-scale conversion of super-
cooled clouds in the atmosphere to ice crystal clouds, by scattering small frag-
ments of dry ice into the cloud from a plane. It is believed that such an opera-
tion is practical and economically feasible and that extensive cloud systems can
be modified in this way.53
Two days before the paper appeared, on Xovember 13, 1946,
Schaefer made his historic flight, accomplishing man's first scientific
seeding of a supercooled cloud, as he scattered three pounds of dry ice
along a 3-mile line over a cloud to the east of Schenectady, X.Y. At
14.000 feet the cloud temperature was —20° C. and in about § minutes
after seeding the entire cloud turned into snow, which fell 2,000 feet
before evaporating.56
Dr. Bernard Vonnegut had also worked on aircraft icing research
and in 1946 at General Electric was pursuing a variety of nueleation
problems ; but. after Schaefer's laboratory experiments, he again
turned his attention to ice nueleation research. He discovered that
silver iodide and lead iodide had crystal structures close to that of ice
and were also insoluble in water, and after repeated initial failures,
owing to impurities in the material, Vonnegut was able to produce ice
crystals, using very pure silver iodide powder, at temperatures only a
few degrees below freezing. Soon means were developed for generating
silver iodide smokes, and man's first successful attempt at artificial
nueleation of supercooled clouds was accomplished.57
Langmuir explained that dry ice could make ice crystals form by
lowering the temperature to that required for natural nueleation on
whatever might be present as nuclei, or even in the absence of all
nuclei; however, the silver iodide provided a nucleus that was much
more efficient than those occurring naturally.58
" Ibid., pp. 9-10.
" Halacy, "The Weather Changers/' ions. pp. S2-S3.
« langmuir. Irvinp. "The Growth of Particles in Smoke, and Clouds and the Production
of Snow from Supercooled Clouds. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol.
92, no. 3, July 1048, p. 182. ' , , _ ,
Schaefer, Vincent J.. "The Production of Ice Crystals in a Cloud of Supercooled Water
Droplets.'- Science, vol. U>4. No. 2707. Nov. 15. 1946, p. 459.
" Byers, "History of Weather Modification," 1074. p. 12.
57 H>id . p. 13.
M Langmuir, Irvine. "Cloud Seeding by Menus of Dry Ice. Silver Iodide, and Sodium
Chloride." Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, ser. II, vol. 14. November
1951, p. 40.
39
Following Schaefer's successful flight of November 13, 1946, and in
the months and immediate years thereafter, Langmuir was quoted in
the popular press as being very optimistic in his predicted benefits
from weather modification. In a 1948 paper he said that k>* * * it
becomes apparent that important changes in the whole weather map
can be brought about by events which are not at present being con-
sidered by meteorologists." 59 His publications and informal statements
of this character touched off years of arguments with professional
meteorologists, by whom refutation was difficult in view of Langmuir s
standing in the scientific community. His enthusiasm for discussing
the potential extreme effects from weather control was unrestrained
until his death in 1957. 60
RESEARCH PROJECTS SINCE 19 4 7
Project Cirrus
Although the business of the General Electric Co. had not been in
meteorology, it supported the early research of Langmuir and his
associates because of the obvious importance of their discoveries.
Realizing that weather modification research was more properly a con-
cern of the Federal Government, the company welcomed the interest
of, and contract support from, the U.S. Army Signal Corps in
February 1947. Subsequently, contract support was augmented by the
Office of Naval Research, the U.S. Air Force provided flight support,
and the U.S. Weather Bureau participated in a consultative role. The
entire program which followed, through 1951, under this arrangement,
including the field activities by Government agencies and the labora-
tory work and general guidance by General Electric, was designated
''Project Cirrus." 61 According to Byers :
The most pronounced effect produced by Project Cirrus and subsequently sub-
stantiated by a number of tests by others, was the clearing of paths through
supercooled stratus cloud layers by means of seeding from an airplane with dry
ice or with silver iodide. When such clouds were not too thick, the snow that was
artificially nucleated swept all the visible particles out of the cloud. * * * In one
of the first flights, * * * the supercooled particles in stratus clouds were removed
using only 12 pounds of dry ice distributed along a 14-mile line. In later flights
even more spectacular results were achieved, documented by good photography. BL'
Initial Project Cirrus studies were made during the summer of
1947 on cumulus clouds near Schenectady, but the important seeding
experiments were conducted the following year in New Mexico. Also
during 1947, there was an attempt on October 13 to modify a hurricane
east of Jacksonville, Fla., through seeding with dry ice.63 Visual ob-
servations, reported by flight personnel, seemed to indicate a pro-
nounced change in the cloud deck after seeding, and, shortly there-
after, the hurricane changed its course and headed directly westward,
striking the coasts of Georgia and South Carolina. Even though there
was precedent for such erratic behavior of hurricanes, there was
speculation about the effect of seeding on the storm path, and the pos-
sibility of legal responsibility for damages which might be caused by
59Lanfrmuir. Irvinp. "The Production of Rain by a Chain Reaction in Cumulus Clouds at
Temperatures Above Freezing." Journal of Meteorology, vol. 5. No. 5. October 1948. p. 192.
6°T?vprs. "Historv of Weather Modification." 1974. pp. 13-14.
61 ThH.. p. 14.
62 Thirl.
M See discussion of Project Stormfury in ch. 5. p. 290 ff.
40
such experiments in the future provided reason to avoid seeding
thereafter any storms with the potential of reaching land. The legal
counsel of the General Electric Co. admonished Langmuir not to
relate the course of the hurricane to the seeding; however, throughout
the remainder of his career he spoke of the great benefit to mankind of
weather control and of the potential ability to abolish evil effects of
hurricanes. As a result, it was expected that the U.S. Weather Bu-
reau would undertake massive efforts in weather control. Meteorolo-
gists within and without of the Bureau were in a defensive position,
with many other scientists, impressed by Langmuirs arguments, op-
posing their position. Thus great controversies which developed
between Langmuir and the Weather Bureau and much of the meteoro-
logical community followed these and other claims, and often
resulted from the fact that Langmuir did not seem to fully comprehend
the magnitude and the mechanisms of atmospheric phenomena.04
Langmuir wanted to ^work where he thought storms originated
rather than in upstate New York. He chose Xew Mexico as operations
area for Project Cirrus, also taking advantage of the opportunity to
collaborate there with Dr. E. J. Workman at the New Mexico Institute
of Mining and Technology, whose thunderstorm research included
radar observations and laboratory experiments on the effects of ire
on storm electrification. After cloud-seeding flights there in October
1948, Langmuir reported that, as a result of the seeding, rainfall had
been produced over an area greater than 40,000 square miles (about
one-fourth the area of the State of New Mexico) . 63
The Project Cirrus group returned to Xew Mexico in July 1040,
and 10 additional seeding nights were conducted. When Langmuir
learned that Vonnegut was dispensing silver iodide from a ground
generator in the same area and had, in fact, also been doing so during
the flights of the previous October, he concluded that both the July
1919 results and the widespread effects of October 1948 were caused
by the silver iodide rather than the dry ice seeding as he had theorized
previously. Spectacular results continued to be reported by him.
spurred on by meteorologists' challenges to his statistical methods
and conclusions. Noting that Vonnegut had operated the ground
generator only on certain days, Langmuir observed that rainfall
responses corresponded to generator "on" times, leading him to his
controversial "periodic seeding experiment.'' to which the remainder
of his life was devoted.66
In the periodic seeding experiment, the silver iodide generators were
operated in an attempt to effect a 7-day periodicity in the behavior of
various weather properties. Langmuir was convinced that unusual
weekly weather periodicities in early 1950 resulted from periodic seed-
ings begun in Xew Mexico in December 1949. concluding that the effects
were more widespread than he felt earlier and that temperatures and
pressures thousands of miles away were also affected. Meteorologists
observed that, while these correlations were the most striking seen, yet
such periodicities were not uncommon.67 The Weather Bureau under-
took a study of records from 1919 to 1951 to see if such weather perio-
" Ibid., pp. 14-16.
■ Ibid., p. 1«.
w Ibid., p in.
r~ Ibid., pp. in 20.
41
dickies had occurred in the past. Glenn W. Brier, author of the report
on this study, indicated that a T-day component in the harmonic anal-
ysis of the data appeared frequently, though seldom as marked as dur-
ing the periodic seeding experiment.68 Byers' opinion is that the evi-
dence appeared just as reliable for occurrence of a natural periodicity
as for one controlled artificially. He contends that the most important
discoveries in cloud physics and weather modification were made in the
General Electric Research Laboratory before Project Cirrus was orga-
nized, that the effect of clearing stratus decks was shown soon after the
project was underway, and that the seeding experiments thereafter
became more of a "program of advocacy than of objective proof." The
project * * failed to demonstrate that seeding of cumulus clouds
increased rainfall, that seeding initiates self -propagating storms, that
the atmosphere responds periodically to periodic seeding, or that a
hurricane could be deflected in its path by seeding." 69
Seeding under Project Cirrus ended in 1951 and the final report
appeared in 1953. After the close of the project, Langmuir continued
his analyses and wrote two more papers before his death in 1957. The
final paper was titled "Freedom — the Opportunity To Profit From the
Unexpected." a report that Byers feels provided a fitting philosophical
close to his career.70 The Defense Department sponsored another series
of experiments, called the Artificial Cloud Xucleation Project, from
1051 to 1953.
Tlie Weather Bureau Cloud Physics project
Amid increasing publicity and spectacular claims of results from
cloud seeding in Project Cirrus, the U.S. Weather Bureau initiated in
1048 a project to test cloud seeding, with the cooperation of the Na-
tional Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, the Navy, and the Air
Force. The Cloud Phvsics Project, the first systematic series of seeding
experiments in stratiform and cumuliform clouds, continued for 2
years, with flight operations in Ohio, California, and the Gulf States.
Findings of Project Cirrus were substantiated in that striking visual
cloud modifications occurred: however, there was no evidence to show
spectacular precipitation effects, and the experiments led to a conserva-
tive assessment of the economic importance of seeding.71 Cloud dissi-
pation rather than new cloud development seemed to be the general
result from seeding, the only precipitation extractable from clouds was
that contained in the clouds themselves, and cloud seeding methods did
not seem to be promising for the relief of drought.72
Bosults of the cloud physics experiment had almost no effect on
the prevalent enthusiasm at the time for rainmaking through cloud
soedino-, oxcent in the "hard core" of the meteorology community.73
As r result of thes<* experiments and the interpretation of the results,
the TToather Bureau and its successor organizations in the Commerce
Department, the Environmental Science Services Administration and
the "National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, have been
os Brier. Glenn W.. "Seven-Dar Periodicities in May 19.~2." Bulletin of the American
Me^eorolosricPl Societr. vol. 35. No. 3. March 1954. pp. 118-121.
p? B^ers. "History of Weather Modification." 1974. pp. 20-21.
70 Ibid., p. 20..
" Flpfisrle. Robert G.. "Background and Present Status of Weather Modification." 196S.
pp 0-10.
■2 B-ers. "^'storv of Weather Modification." 1074. pp. 10-17.
»» Ibid,, p. 17.
42
regarded by some critics as unimaginative and overconservative on
weather modification.74
The U.S. experiments of 1953-54
In 1951 the Weather Bureau, the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force
appointed an advisory group, chaired by Dr. Sverre Petterssen of
the University of Chicago, under whose advice and guidance the
following six weather modification projects were initiated : 75
1. Seeding of extratropical cyclones, sponsored by the Office of
Naval Research and conducted by Xew York University.
2. Seeding of migratory cloud systems associated with fronts and
cyclones, conducted by the Weather Bureau.
3. Treatment of connective clouds, supported by the Air Force and
conducted by the University of Chicago.
4. Research on the~dissipation of cold stratus and fog, conducted
by the Army Signal Corps.
5. Studies of the physics of ice fogs, sponsored by the Air Force
and conducted by the Stanford Research Institute.
6. Investigation of a special warm stratus and fog treatment svs-
tem, sponsored by the Army and conducted by Arthur D. Little, Inc.
Field experiments on these projects were carried out in 1953 and
1954, and reports were published under the auspices of the American
Meteorological Society in 195T.76
The purpose of the extratropical cyclone seeding project, called
Project Scud, was to "* * * ascertain whether or not it would be
possible to modify the development and behavior of extratropical
cyclones by artificial nucleation. * * *" 77 Analysis obtained in Scud
from Florida to Long Island showed that "* * * the seeding in this
experiment failed to produce any effects which were large enough to be
detected against the background of natural meteorological variance." 7S
The Weather Bureau project on migratory cloud systems was con-
ducted in western Washington on cloud systems that enter the area
from the Pacific during the rainy winter months. This project was
criticized by commercial seeders since it was conducted in the West,
which was considered "their territory," and by those who accused the
Weather Bureau of seeking a negative result to support their conserva-
tive view toward weather modification. Byers feels that there was an
attempt to avoid this negative impression by giving a more positive
interpretation to the results than the data possibly justified.79 In sum-
marizing results. Hall stated:
Considering the results as a whole there is no strong evidence to support a con-
clusion that the seeding produced measurable changes in rainfall. * * * the eval-
uations do not necessarily furnish information on what the effect might have been
with more or less intense seeding activity, rate of release of dry ice, etc. Also it
71 Pleagle. "Background and Present Status of Weather Modification.'' 1998, p 10»
« Byers, "History of Weather Modification," 1074. p. 25.
7.) Prtterssen, Sverre. Jerome Sp;ir. Ferguson Hall. Roscoe R. Braham. Jr., Louis J. Rat-
tan. Horace R. Byers, H. J. aufm Kamoe. J. J. Kelly, and H. K. Welcfcraann. "Cloud and
Weather Modification; a Croup of Field Experiments." Meteorological Monographs, vol. 2.
No 11 American Meteorological Society, Boston. 10."»7. Ill pp.
"Petterssen, Sverre. "Reports on Experiments with Artificial Cloud Nucleation: Intro-
ductory Note." In Petterssen et al . "Cloud and Weather Modification : ii Croup of Field
Experiments," Meteorological Monographs, vol. 2. No. n. American Meteoroio.^icnl Society.
Boston. 1957, p, S.
T" Spar. Jerome "Prolecl Send." in Petterssen et al.. "Cloud mid Weather Modification ;
:i Group of Field Experiments." Meteorological Monojrra plis. vol. 2. No. 11. American Mete-
orological Society, P.oston. ior>7, n 22.
"Byers. "History of Weather Modification," 1074. p. 26.
43
might be speculated that the seeding increased rainfall on some occasions and
decreased it on others.80
The aim of the University of Chicago Cloud Physics project was as
follows : 81
The formulation of a consistent and immediately applicable picture of the
processes of formation of cumulus clouds, charged centers, and precipitation with
a view toward testing the possibility that one can modify these processes and
influence the natural behavior of clouds.
So that as many cumulus clouds as possible could be tested, work was
conducted in the Middle West in the summer and in the Caribbean in
the winter, realizing that the warm trade-wind cumulus clouds in the
latter region might be amenable to seeding with large hygroscopic
nuclei or water spray, and that the ice-crystal process would operate to
initiate precipitation in the colder clouds of the Middle West.82, Of the
numerous conclusions from this project 83 a few will serve to indicate
the value of the project to the understanding of cloud phenomena and
weather modification. In the Caribbean tests, water spray from an air-
craft was seen to increase rainfall as determined by radar echoes ; anal-
ysis showed that the treatment doubled the probability of occurrence of
a radar echo in a cloud. From tests on dry ice seeding in the Middle
West it was found that in the majority of cases treated clouds showed
an echo, while untreated ones did not, although the sample was consid-
ered too small to be significant. In all cases clouds were considered in
pairs, one treated by seeding and the other untreated, and only those
clouds showing no echo initially were chosen for study.84
The seeding experiments with supercooled stratus clouds by the
Army Signal Corps essentially substantiated the results of Project
Cirrus; however, from these carefully conducted tests a number of
new relationships w^ere observed with regard to seeding rates, spread
of glaciating effect, cloud thickness, overseeding, and cloud formation
after seeding.S5 The report on this project carefully summarized these
relationships and conclusions for both dry ice and silver iodide
seeding.86
The Air Force project on the physics of ice fogs, conducted by
Stanford Research Institute, was intended to learn the relationship
to such fogs of synoptic situations, local sources of water, and pollu-
tion. Investigations in Alaska at air bases showed that most fogs
developed from local sources of water and pollution. In the Arthur L).
Little investigation for the Army attempts were made to construct
generators which were capable of producing space charges, associated
with aerosols, that could bring about precipitation of the water drop-
lets in warm fogs and stratus.87
» Hail, Ferguson. "The Weather Bureau ACN Project." In Petterssen et al., "Cloud and
Weather Modification ; a Group of Field Experiments," Meteorological Monographs, vol. 2.
No. 11. American Meteorological Society. Boston. 1957. pp. 45-46.
slBraham. Roscoe R., Jr.. Louis J. Battan. and Horace R. Byers. "Artificial Nucleation
of Cumulus Clouds." In Petterssen et al.. "Cloud and Weather Modification : a Group of
Field Experiments," 1957, p. 47.
& Byers, "History of Weather Modification," 1974, pp. 26-27.
83 Conclusions are precisely spelled out in somewhat technical terms in : Braham, Battan.
and Byers. "Artificial Nucleation of Cumulus Clouds," 1957, pp. S2-S3.
fi Byers, "History of Weather Modification," 1974, p. 27.
86 IMd. . » ,
86aufm Kampe, H. J., J. J. Kelly, and H. K. Weickmann, "Seeding Experiments m Sub-
cooled Stratus Clouds." In Petterssen et al.. "Cloud and Weather Modification : a Group of
Field Experiments." Meteorological Monographs, vol. 2, No. 11. American Meteorological
Society. Boston, 1957, p. 93. , T . , .
57 Petterssen, "Reports on Experiments With Artificial Cloud Nucleation: Introductory
Note," 1957, p. 4.
44
Brers, in retrospect, wonders why the results of this series of six
experiments, which were carefully controlled statistically, did not
receive more attention than was accorded them. He attributes some
of this lack of visibility to the publication in the somewhat obscure
monograph of the American Meteorological Society 88 and to the delay
in publishing the results, since the Petterssen committee held the manu-
scripts until all were completed, so that they could be submitted for
publication together.89
Arizona mountain cumulus experiments
After 1954, the University of Chicago group joined with the Insti-
tute of Atmospheric Physics at the University of Arizona in seeding
tests in the Santa Catalina Mountains in southern Arizona. These
experiments were conducted in two phases, from 1957 through 1960
and from 1901 through 1964, seeding mostly summer cumulus clouds,
but some winter storms, with silver iodide from aircraft. In the first
phase, analysis of precipitation data from the first 2 years revealed
more rainfall during seeded than on nonseeded days ; however, during
the latter 2 years, considerably more rainfall was achieved on non-
seeded days. Combining all data for the 4 years of the first phase
yielded overall results with more rain on unseeded days than on seeded
days; hence, the experiments were modified and the second phase
undertaken. Of the 3 years in the second phase, only one showed more
rain on seeded days than on nonseeded ones. None of the analyses
attempted could support the hypothesis that airborne silver iodide
seeding increased precipitation or influenced its area! extent. Byers
suggests that the failure to increase rainfall may have been due to the
fact that precipitation initiation resulted from the coalescence process
rather than the ice-crystal process.90
Project Whitetop
According to Byers, perhaps the most extensive and most sophisti-
cated weather modification experiment (at least up to the time of
Byers' historical review in 1973) was a 5-year program of summer
convective cloud seeding in south-central Missouri, called Project
Whitetop. Conducted from 19G0 through 1964 by a group from the
University of Chicago, led by Dr. Roscoe 11. Braham, the purpose of
Whitetop was to settle with finality the question of whether or not
summer convective clouds of the Midwest could be seeded with silver
iodide to enhance or initiate precipitation. Experimental days were
divided into seeding and no seeding days, chosen randomly from
operational days suitable for seeding, based on certain moisture cri-
teria. Another feature of the project was the attempt to determine the
extent of spreading of silver iodide smoke plumes from the seeding
line. Precipitation effects were evaluated by radar and by a rain-gage
network.01
Final analysis of all of the Project Whitetop data showed that the
overall effect was that, in the presence of silver iodide nuclei, the rain-
fall was less than in the unseeded areas. Byers attributes these negative
88 Petterssen et al.. "Cloud and Weather Modification; a Group of Field Experiments,"
1957.
*> livers. "History of Weather Modification," 11)74, p. 2S.
»° Il)ld., p. 29.
« Ibid., pp. 20-30.
45
results to the physical data obtained from cloud-physics aircraft. "Most
of the Missouri clouds produced raindrops by the coalescence process
below the freezing line, and these drops were carried in the updrafts
and frozen as ice pellets at surprisingly high subf reezing temperatures
( — 5° C to —10° C)." He further points out that the measured con-
centrations of ice particles, for the range of sizes present, were already
in the natural unseeded conditions equivalent to those hoped for with
seeding; consequently, the silver iodide only had the effect of over-
seeding.92
Climax experiments
Following the initial General Electric experiments, it was concluded
by Bergeron 93 that the best possibility for causing considerable rain-
fall increase by artifical means might be found in seeding orographic 94
cloud systems. Consequently, there were almost immediate efforts to
increase orographic precipitation, the greatest concentration of such
work being in the Western United States. Commercial groups such
as power companies and irrigation concerns took the early initiative in
attempts to augment snowfall from orographic cloud systems in order
to increase streamflow from the subsequent snowmelt.
Colorado State University (CSU) began a randomized seeding
experiment in the high Rocky Mountains of Colorado in 1960, under
the direction of Lewis O. Grant, to investigate snow augmentation
from orographic clouds. The project was designed specifically to
(1) evaluate the potential, (2) define seedability criteria, and (3) de-
velop a technology for seeding orographic clouds in central Colorado.95
It followed the 1957 report of the President's Advisory Committee for
Weather Control, in which it had been concluded that seeding of oro-
graphic clouds could increase precipitation by 10 to 15 percent, basing
this judgment, however, on data from a large number of seeding pro-
grams that had not been conducted on a random basis.96
The first group of the CSU seeding experiments took place from
1960 to 1965 in the vicinity of Climax, Colo., and has been designated
Climax I. A second set of tests in the same area from 1965 to 1970
has been referred to as Climax II. The Climax experiments are impor-
tant in the history of weather modification because they were the first
intensive projects of their kind and also because positive results
were reported.97 The precipitation for all seeded cases was greater than
for all of the unseeded cases by 9, 13, and 39 percent, respectively, for
Climax I, Climax II, and Climax IIB. The latter set of data are a
subsample of those from Climax II, from which possibly contaminated
cases due to upwind seeding by other groups were eliminated.98
Ibid., p. 30.
93 Bergeron, Tor, "The Problem of an Artificial Control of Rainfall on the Globe ; General
Effects of Ice Nuclei in Clouds." Tellus, vol. 1, No. 1, February 1949, p. 42.
94 A definition of orographic clouds, a discussion of their formation, and a summary of
attempts to modify them are found in ch. 3, p. 71 ff.
95 Grant, Lewis O., and Archie M. Kahan, "Weather Modification for Augmenting Oro-
graphic Precipitation." In Wilmot N. Hess (editor), "Weather and Climate Modification,"
New York, Wiley, 1974, p. 295.
98 Advisory Committee on Weather Control. Final Report of the Advisory Committee on
Weather Control, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, Dec. 31, 1957, vol. I,
p. vi. (The establishment of the Advisory Committee and its activities leading to publica-
tion of its final report are discussed in ch. 5, under activities of the Congress and of the
executive branch of the Federal Government, see pp. 195. 214, and 236.)
97 Byers, "History of Weather Modification," 1974, pp. 30-31. „
98 Grant and Kahan, "Weather Modification for Augmenting Orographic Precipitation,
1974, p. 298.
46
Lightning suppression experiments
From 1947 until the close of Project Cirrus, interspersed with his
other activities, Vincent Schaefer visited U.S. Forest Service instal-
lations in the northern Rockies in order to assist in attempts to sup-
press lightning by cloud seeding. As early as 1949 an attempt was
made to seed thunderstorm clouds with dry ice, dumping it from the
open door of a twin-engine aircraft flying at 25,000 feet." This
stimulated curiosity among those involved, but also showed that light-
ning-prevention research wTould require a long and carefully planned
effort. These early activities led to the formal establishment of Proj-
ect Skyfire in 1953, aimed at lightning suppression, as part of the
overall research program of the Forest Service. Throughout the his-
tory of the project, research benefited from the cooperation and sup-
port of many agencies "and scientific groups, including the National
Science Foundation, the Weather Bureau, Munitalp Foundation, the
Advisory Committee on Weather Control, the National Park Service,
General Electric Research Laboratories, Meteorology, Inc., and sev-
eral universities. The project was phased out by the Forest Service
in the 1970's, since results of years of tests were inconclusive, although
there had been some reports of success. Skyfire was the longest con-
tinuing Federal weather modification research project, enduring for
about 20 years.1
Fog dispersal research
Experiments were conducted on clearing supercooled fog from run-
ways at Orly Airport in Paris since 1962, using sprays of liquid pro-
pane. Soon after these successful tests, the method became operational
and has already succeeded in various U.S. Air Force installations. The
dissipation of cold fog is now operational also at many locations,
including some in North America and in the Soviet Union. Warm fogs,
however, are more common over the inhabited globe, and efforts to
dissipate them had not advanced very far, even by 1970.2
Hurricane modification
In an earlier discussion of the work of Langmuir and his associates
under Project Cirrus, an attempt at hurricane modification was men-
tioned.3 The historical unfolding of hurricane research in the United
States thereafter will not be reported here since it is discussed in detail
in chapter 5, under Project Stormfury, now a major weather modifica-
tion research program of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-
ministration of the U.S. Department of Commerce.4
Hail suppression
The principal lead in research to suppress hail during the 1950's and
1960's was not in the United States, but mainly elsewhere, particularly
in Switzerland, France, Italy, tho U.S.S.R., Argentina, Bulgaria,
Yugoslavia, Kenya, and Canada. Hail suppression is based on the
86 Barrows J S. "Preventing Fire from the Sky." In U.S. Department of Agriculture,
"The Yearbook of Agriculture, 1968: Science for Better Living." Washington. D.C., U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1968, p. 219.
1 For a more detailed discussion of Project Skyfire, see p. 309, under the weather modi-
fication program of the Department of Agriculture in ch. r>.
2 Byers, "History of Weather Modification," 1974, p. 33.
3 See p. 39.
* See p. 296.
47
hypothesis that, if a cloud is supplied with a superabundance of ice
nuclei, the available water will be used to form a great number of snow
crystals, thus depriving the hailstones of sufficient water to grow
to damaging size. Most of the early foreign attempts to suppress hail
using explosive rockets or ground-based silver iodide generators
proved disappointing.5
In the Soviet Union, the Caucasus hail suppression experiments of
the mid-1960's were of great interest to cloud physicists. Using radar
to locate the zone of greatest water content in convective clouds and
rockets with explosive warheads to deliver lead iodide with precision
into this zone, the Russians claimed success in suppressing hailstorms,
based on statistical reduction in crop damages. Operational hail sup-
pression activity is now conducted on a large scale in the Soviet
Union.6- 7 Most hail suppression efforts in the United States in the
1960's were commercial operations which did not produce data of any
significant value for further analysis.
Foreign weather modification research
While the Russians and some other countries have concentrated on
hail suppression research, Australia, like the United States, has been
principally concerned with augmenting precipitation. Very shortly
after Schaefer first seeded a natural cloud with dry ice, Krauss and
Squires of the Australian Weather Bureau seeded stratonimbus clouds
in February 1947 near Sidney. The Commonwealth Scientific and
Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) subsequently organized,
under Dr. E. G. Bowen, what might then have been the world's out-
standing group of cloud physics and weather modification scientists.
Byers feels that probably "* * * no other group contributed more to
practical cloud physics during the period approximately from 1950 to
1965." 8
The Snowy Mountain project in Australia, whose object was to pro-
duce a significant precipitation increase over the mountains by silver
iodide seeding, has attracted most attention. For a 5-year period from
1955 through 1959, this experiment was conducted during the colder
part of the Southern Hemisphere year, using silver iodide dispensed
from aircraft. Although initial experimental reports indicated suc-
cessful increases in precipitation over the target, the final 1963 re-
port after complete analysis stated that results were encouraging but
inconclusive.9
Interesting experiments were carried out in Israel during the 1960's,
using airborne silver iodide seeding of mostly cumulus clouds. Statis-
tical analysis of data from the first 5% years of tests revealed an in-
crease of 18 percent in rainfall.10
A project called Gross versuch III was conducted on the southern
slopes of the Alps in Switzerland. Although initiated as a randomized
hail suppression experiment, using ground-based silver iodide gen-
erators, the analysis indicated that hail frequency was greater on
5 Byers, "Histry of Weather Modification," pp. 31-32.
6 Ibid., p. 32.
7 The hail suppression efforts of the U.S.S.R. are discussed in more detail under the status
of hail suppression technology in ch. 3, p. 88, and under foreign programs in ch. 9, 412.
8 Byers, "History of Weather Modification," 1974, p. 23.
9 Ibid., pp. 23-24.
" Ibid., p. 31.
48
seeded than on nonseeded days, but that the average rainfall on seeded
days was 21 percent greater than on nonseeded days.11
COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS
In the weeks and months following Schaefer's first cloud seeding
experiment public interest grew, and Langmuir and Schaefer spoke
before and consulted with groups of water users, farmers and ranchers,
city officials, Federal program directors, and scientific societies. As a
result there was a burgeoning of new cloud-seeding efforts initiated by
commercial operators, industrial organizations, water districts, and
groups of farmers. Some used ground generators for dispensing silver
iodide obviating the need for airplanes and their attendant high costs,
so that many such opepations became quite profitable. Many rain-
makers were incompetent and some were unscrupulous, but their activi-
ties flourished for a while, as the experiments of Shaefer and Lang-
muir were poorly imitated. Some of the more reliable companies are
still in business today, and their operations have provided data valu-
able to the development of weather modification technology.12
Byers relates a few instances of early commercial operations of
particular interest.13 In 1949-50 the city of New York hired Dr. Wal-
lace E. Howell, a former associate of Langmuir, to augment its water
supply by cloud seeding. New York's citizenry became interested and
involved in discussions over Howell's activities as the news media made
them known. This project was also the first case where legal action was
taken against cloud seeding by persons whose businesses could be
adversely affected by the increased rain. Although rains did come and
the city reservoirs were filled, Howell could not prove that he was re-
sponsible for ending the drought.14 Howell subsequently seeded in
Quebec in August 1953 in an attempt to put out a forest fire and in
Cuba to increase rainfall for a sugar plantation owner.15
The Santa Barbara project in California, also a commercial opera-
tion designed to increase water supply, received a great deal of atten-
tion. In this period water was increased through augmenting rain and
snow in the mountains north and northeast of the city. The project
was evaluated by the California State Water Resources Board and
was unique among commercial contract operations, inasmuch as the
clients permitted randomization (that is, random selection of only
some storms for seeding) in order to allow adequate evaluation.16
In the West the earliest commercial operations were developed
under Dr. Irving P. Krick, formerly head of the Department of Mete-
orology at the California Institute of Technology. Asked to monitor
aerial dry ice seeding over Mt. San Jacinto in 1947, Krick became
interested in weather modification, left Caltech, and formed his own
company. Seeding projects were carried out during 1948 and 1949 for
ranchers in San Diego County, Calif., in Mexico, and in Arizona. In
1050 lie moved to Denver and formed a new company, which began
seeding activity over the Great Plains, elsewhere in the West, and in
" Ibid.
12 Ibid., pp. 17, 21. 22.
" Ibid., pp. 22-23.
w Ibid., p. 22.
15 Hnlacv. "The Weather Chancers, " 1968, pp. 96-97.
"Ibid., pp. 22-23.
49
other countries. A number of former students of Krick joined him or
formed other cloud seeding companies, mostly in the West during the
1950's.17 By 1953 Krick had operated 150 projects in 18 States and 6
foreign countries and amassed over 200,000 hours of seeding time. For
three winters — 1949, 1950, and 1951 — his company claimed that they
had increased the snowpack in the Rockies around Denver from 175 to
288 percent over the average of the previous 10 years. After 6 months
of seeding in Texas in 1953, the water in a drainage basin near Dallas
had increased to 363 percent of the January 1 level, while in nearby
nonseeded basins water ranged from a 22-percent deficit to an increase
of 19 percent.18
At the start of extensive seeding in the early 1950's there was a sharp
increase in commercial operations, accompanied by great publicity as
drought began in the Great Plains. During the middle and latter 1950's,
however, seeding diminished as did the drought. The some 30 annual
seeding projects in the United States during the mid and latter 1950's
and the 1960's (excluding fog clearing projects) were conducted for
the most part by about five firms, on whose staffs there were skilled
meteorologists, cloud physicists, and engineers for installing and main-
taining ground and air systems. Most of these projects were in the
categories of enhancing rain or snowfall, with a distribution in a
typical year as follows : About a dozen in the west coast States, half
a dozen in the Rocky Mountains-Great Basin area, half a dozen in
the Great Plains, and the remainder in the rest of the United States.
Of the projects in the West, six to nine have been watershed projects
sponsored by utility companies. Most of these projects endured for
long periods of years and many are still underway.19
Fleagle notes that by the early 1950's, 10 percent of the land area
of the United States was under commercial seeding operations and
$3 million to $5 million was being expended annually by ranchers,
towns, orchardists, public utilities, and resort operators. The extent
of such commercial operations receded sharply, and by the late 1950's
business was only about one-tenth or less than it had been a decade
earlier. As noted above, public utilities were among those who con-
tinued to sponsor projects throughout this period.20
Figure 1 shows the purposes of weather modification operations for
various sections of the United States for the period July 1950 through
June 1956. For each geographical section the column graphs represent
the percentage of the total U.S. seeding for each of five purposes that
was performed in that section. The bar graph in the inset shows the
percentage of total U.S. cloud-seeding effort that is undertaken for
each of these five purposes. Figure 2 shows the total area coverage
and the percent of U.S. territory covered by cloud seeding for each
year from July 1950 through June 1956. Both figures are from the
final report of the President's Advisory Committee on Weather
Control.21
17 Elliott, Robert D., "Experience of the Private Sector," 1974, p. 47.
18 Halacy, "The Weather Changers," 1968, p. 96.
19 Elliott, "Experience of the Private Sector," 1974, p. 46-48.
20 Fleagle, "Background and Present Status of Weather Modification." 1968, p. 11.
21 Advisory Committee on Weather Control, Final Report, 1958, vol. II. Figures lacing
p. 242 and 243.
Figure 1 — Purposes of weather modification operations conducted in various
geographical sections of the United States, July 1950 through June 1956. (From
Final Report of the Advisory Committee on Weather Control, 1958.)
51
CLOOP SiiPiHG IN THE UHITBP STATES
-15%
1950- 1951- 1952- 1953- (954- 1935-
1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1936
Figure 2. — Total area coverage and percent of area coverage for the 48 cotermi-
' nous States of the United States by weather modification operations for each
year, July 1950 through June 1956. (From Final Report of the Advisory
Committee on Weather Control, 1958.)
Table 1 is a summary of weather modification operations for fiscal
years 1966, 1967, and 1968, compiled by the National Science Founda-
tion from field operators' reports which the Foundation required to be
filed. Figure 3 shows the locations in the continental United States for
both operational and research weather modification projects during
fiscal year 1968. In September 1968, as provided by Public Law 90-407,
the National Science Foundation was no longer authorized to require
the submission of reports on operational weather modification proj-
ects.22 Weather modification activities are now reported to the Depart-
ment of Commerce, under provisions of Public Law 92-205, and sum-
mary reports of these activities are published from time to time.23
22 See discussions of this law and of the activities of the National Science Foundation as
lead weather modification acency through September 1968. pp 196 and 215 in ch. 5.
23 See discussions of Public Law 92-205 and of the weather modification activities report-
ing program in ch. 5, 197 and 232. The activities summarized in the latest available
Department of Commerce report are discussed in ch. 7 and listed in app. G.
52
TABLE 1.— SUMMARY OF WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES FROM FIELD OPERATORS' REPORTS, FISCAL YEARS
1966, 1967, AND 1968 i (FROM NSF TENTH ANNUAL REPORT OF WEATHER MODIFICATION, 1968)
Area treated Number of Number of Number of
(square miles) projects States2 operators2
Purpose 1966 1967 1968 1966 1967 1968 1966 1967 1968 1966 1967 1968
Rain augmentation and snow-
pack increase 61,429 62,021 53,369 35 41 37 21 20 21 22 25 23
Hail suppression 20,566 20,556 13,510 3 4 4 3 3 5 3 4 4
Fog dissipation 100 118 145 22 15 15 15 13 9 17 15 10
Cloud modification 19,345 28,300 18,600 9 18 8 8 12 7 8 14 6
Lightning suppression 314 314 314 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Totals... 101,744 111,383 85,938 70 79 65 30 23 25 46 44 37
1 Data for fiscal year 1968 include reports received to Sept. 1, 1968.
2 Totals are not the sum of the items since many States and operators are involved in more than one type of activity.
An early commercial hail suppression project was begun in Colorado
in 1958. Eventually it involved 5 seeding aircraft and about 125
ground-based generators "making it the largest single cloud-seeding
project up to that time. Results of the project were examined at Colo-
rado State University and presented at the International Hail Con-
ference in Verona, Italy, in 1960. This project stimulated the interest
of scientists and provided historical roots for what later was estab-
lished as the National Hail Research Experiment in the same area over
a decade later by the National Science Foundation.2'4' 25
During the 1960's, clearing of cold airport fog through cloud seed-
ing became an operational procedure. Since the techniques used can
only be applied to cold fog, they were used at the more northerly
or high-altitude airports of the United States, where about 15 such
projects were conducted, and are still underway, each winter.2,6
2* Elliott, "Experience of the Private Sector," 1974, p. 48.
23 The National Hail Research Experiment is discussed in detail under the weather modi-
fier lion program ol" the Xationa' Science Foundation in ch. 5 ; se p. 274ff.
28 Elliott, "Experience of the Private Sector," 1974. pp. 48-49.
53
Figure 3. — Weather modification projects in the United States during fiscal year
1968. (From NSF Tenth Annual Report on weather modification, 1968.)
HISTORY OF FEDERAL ACTIVITIES, COMMITTEES, POLICY STUDIES, AND
REPORTS
In the various discussions under activities of the Congress and the
executive branch of the Federal Government in chapter 5, there are
historical accounts of legislative actions pertinent to weather modifica-
tion, of the establishment and functioning of special committees in
accordance with public laws or as directed by the executive agencies,
and of the policy and planning studies and reports produced by the
special committees or by the agencies. Inclusion of a separate historical
account of these Federal activities at this point would be largely repeti-
tive, and the reader is referred to the various sections of chapter 5, in
which historical developments of various Federal activities are un-
folded as part of the discussions of those activities.
I
CHAPTER 3
TECHNOLOGY OF PLANNED WEATHER MODIFICATION
(By Robert E. Morrison, Specialist in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research
Division, Congressional Research Service)
Introduction
Although the theoretical basis for weather modification was laid to
a large extent during the 1930's, the laboratory and field experiments
which ushered in the "modern era" occurred in 1946 and in the years
immediately thereafter. By 1950, commercial cloud seeding had become
widespread, covering an estimated total U.S. land area of about 10 per-
cent.1 By the mid-1950's, however, it was apparent that the funda-
mental atmospheric processes which come into play in weather
modification are very complex and were far from being understood. A
period of retrenchment and reevaluation began, the number of com-
mercial operators had decreased dramatically, and weather modifica-
tion had fallen into some disrepute among many meteorologists and
much of the public. A period of carefully designed experiments was
initiated about two decades ago, supported by increased cloud physics
research and increasingly more sophisticated mathematical models and
statistical evaluation schemes.
Meanwhile, a small group of commercial operators, generally more
reliable and more responsible than the typical cloud seeder of the 1950
era, has continued to provide operational weather modification services
to both public and private sponsors. These operators have attempted to
integrate useful research results into their techniques and have pro-
vided a bank of operational data useful to the research community.
The operational and research projects have continued over the past two
decades, often in a spirit of cooperation, not always characteristic of
the attitudes of scientists and private operators in earlier years. Often
the commercial cloud seeders have contracted for important roles in
major field experiments, where their unique experiences have been
valuable assets.
Through the operational experiences and research activities of the
past 30 years, a kind of weather modification technology has been
emerging. Actually, though some practices are based on common theory
and constitute the basic techniques for meeting a number of seeding
objectives, there are really a series of weather modification technol-
ogies, each tailored to altering a particular atmospheric phenomenon
and each having reached a different state of development and opera-
tional usefulness. At one end of this spectrum is cold fog clearing, con-
sidered to be operational now, while the abatement of severe storms, at
1 Fleagle. Robert G., "Background and Present Status of Weather Modification." In
"Weather Modification : Science and Public Policy," Seattle, University of Washington
Press, 1968, p. 11.
(55)
56
the other extreme, remains in the initial research phase. Progress to
date in development of these technologies has not been nearly so much
a function of research effort expended as it has depended on the funda-
mental atmospheric processes and the ease by which they can be altered.
There is obvious need for further research and development to refine
techniques in those areas where there has been some success and to
advance technology were progress has been slow or at a virtual
standstill.
ASSESSMENT OF THE STATUS OF WFjATHER MODIFICATION TECHNOLOGY
Recently, the following summary of the current status of weather
modification technology was prepared by the Weather Modification
Advisory Board :
1. The only routine operational projects are for clearing cold fog.
Research on warm fog has yielded some useful knowledge and good
models, but the resulting technologies are so costly that they are usable
mainly for military purposes and very busy airports.
2. Several long-running efforts to increase winter snowpack by
seeding clouds in the mountains suggest that precipitation can be
increased by some 15 percent over what would have happened
"naturally."
3. A decade and a half of experience with seeding winter clouds on
the U.S. west coast and in Israel, and summer clouds in Florida, also
suggest a 10- to 15-percent increase over "natural'' rainfall. Hypotheses
and techniques from the work in one area are not directly transferable
to other areas, but will be helpful in designing comparable experiments
with broadly similar cloud systems.
4. Xumerous efforts to increase rain by seeding summer clouds in the
central and western parts of the United States have left many ques-
tions unanswered. A major experiment to try to answer them — for the
High Plains area — is now in its early stages.
5. It is scientifically possible to open holes in wintertime cloud layers
by seeding them. Increasing sunshine and decreasing energy con-
sumption may be especially relevant to the northeastern quadrant of
the United States.
6. Some $10 million is spent by private and local public sponsors for
cloud-seeding efforts, but these projects are not designed as scientific
experiments and it is difficult to say for sure that operational cloud
seeding causes the claimed results.
7. Knowledge about hurricanes is improving with good models of
their behavior. But the experience in modifying that behavior is primi-
tive so far. It is inherently difficult to find enough test cases, especially
since experimentation on tvphoons in the "Western Pacific has been
blocked for the time being by international political objections.
8. Although the Soviets and some U.S. private oi>erators claim some
success in suppressing hail by seeding clouds, our understanding of the
physical processes that create hail is still weak. The one major U.S.
field experiment increased our understanding of severe storms, but
otherwise proved mostlv the dimensions of what we do not vet know.
0. There have been many efforts to suppress lightning by seeding
thunderstorms. Our knowledge of the processes involved is fair, but
57
the technology is still far from demonstrated, and the U.S. Forest
Service has recently abandoned further lightning experiments.2
Lewis O. Grant recently summarized the state of general disagree-
ment on the status of weather modification technology and its readiness
for application.
There is a wide diversity of opinion on weather modification. Some believe
that weather modification is now ready for widespread application. In strong
contrast, others hold that application of the technology may never be possible
or practical on any substantial scale.3
He concludes that —
Important and steady advances have been made in developing technology for
applied weather modification, but complexity of the problems and lack of ade-
quate research resources and commitment retard progress.4
In 1975, David Atlas, then president of the American Meteorologi-
cal Society, expressed the following pessimistic opinion on the status
of weather modification technology :
Almost no one doubts the economic and social importance of rainfall augmenta-
tion, hail suppression, fog dissipation, and severe storm abatement. But great
controversy continues about just what beneficial modification effects have been
demonstrated or are possible. Claims and counterclaims abound. After three
decades of intense research and operational weather modification activities, only
a handful of experiments have demonstrated beneficial effects to the general
satisfaction of the scientific community.
To describe weather modification as a "technology" is to encourage misunder-
standing of the state of the weather modification art. The word "technology"
implies that the major substantive scientific foundations of the field have been
established and. therefore, that all that is required is to develop and apply tech-
niques. But one of the conclusions of the special AMS study on cloud physics was
that "the major bottleneck impeding developments of useful deliberate weather
modification techniques is the lack of an adequate scientific base." 5
At a 1975 workshop on the present and future role of weather modi-
fication in agriculture, a panel of 10 meteorologists assessed the ca-
pabilities for modifying various weather and weather-related phenom-
ena, both for the present and for the period 10 to 20 years in the fu-
ture. Conclusions from this assessment are summarized in table 1. The
table shows estimated capabilities for both enhancement and dissipa-
tion, and includes percentages of change and areas affected, where
appropriate.6
A recent study by Barbara Farhar and Jack Clark surveyed the
opinions of 551 scientists, all involved in some aspect of weather modi-
fication, on the current status of various weather modification technol-
2 Weather Modification Advisory Board. "A U.S. Policy to Enhance the Atmospheric
Environment." Oct. 21, 1977. In testimony by Harlan Cleveland "Weather Modification."
he-ring before the Subcommittee on the Environment arid the Atmosphere. Comnrtee on
Science and Technology. U.S. House of Representatives. 95th Cong.. 1st sess.. Oct. 26, 1977.
Washington. DC U.S. Government Prfnt'nsr Office. 1077. pp. 28-30.
3 Grant. Lewis 0., "Scientific and Other Uncertainties of Weather Modification." In Wil-
liam A. Thomas (editor). "Legal and Scientific Uncertainties of Weather Modification.'
Proceedings of a symposium convened at Duke University, Mar. 11-12. 1976, by the
National Conference of Lawyers and Scientists. Durham. N.C., Duke University Press.
1977. p. 7. .
4 Ibid., p. 17.
5 Atlas. David. "Selling Atmospheric Science. The President's Page." Bulletin of the
American Meteorological Societv. vol. 56. No. 7. July 1975. p. 6SS.
6 Grant. Lewis O. and John D. Reid (compilers). "Workshop for an Assessment of the
Present and Potential Role of Weather Modification in Agricultural Production." Colorado
State Universitv. Fort Collins. Colo., July 15-1S. 1975. August 1975. PB-245-633. pp.
34-44.
58
ogies.7 Table 2 is a summary of the assessments of the level of develop-
ment for each of 12 such technologies included in the questionaire to
which the scientists responded, and table 3 shows the estimates of ef-
fectiveness for 7 technologies where such estimates are pertinent. Re-
sults of this study were stratified in accordance with respondents' af-
filiation, specific education, level of education, age, and responsibility
or interest in weather modification, and tabulated summaries of
opinions on weather modification in accordance with these variables ap-
pear in the report by Farhar and Clark.8
TABLE 1.— ASSESSMENT OF THE CAPABILITIES FOR MODIFYING VARIOUS WEATHER AND WEATHER-RELATED
NATURAL PHENOMENA, BASED ON THE OPINIONS OF 10 METEOROLOGISTS
[From Grant and Reid, 1975)
Enhancement Dissipation
Amount Amount
change Area change Area
(per- (square (per- (square
Modified variable Now 10 to 20 yr cent) miles) Now 10 to 20 yr cent) miles)
I. Clouds:
1. Cold stratus No (8)
2. Warm stratus No (10)
3. Fog, cold Yes (10)
4. Fog, warm Yes (10)
5. Fog, artifical (for
temperature con-
trol) Yes (10)
6. Contrails Yes (10)
7. Cirrus... Yes (5)
8. Carbon black No (10)
9. Aerosol Yes (7)
II. Convective precipitation:
1. Isolated small Yes (7)
2. Isolated large No (6)
3. Squall lines Yes (5)
4. Nocturnal Yes (5)
5. Imbedded cyclonic. . Yes (9)
6. Imbedded Oro-
graphic Yes (9)
III. Stratoform precip-
itation:
1. Orographic Yes (10)
2. Cyclonic No (10)
3. Cloud water collec-
tion Yes (10)
IV. Hazards:
1. Hail Yes (5)
2. Lightning Yes (7)
3. Erosion— wind
gradient No (10)
4. Erosion— water
drop size Yes (5)
5. Wind— hurricane No (5)
6. Tornado. No (10)
7. Blowdown No (5)
8. Floods— symoptic ... No (10)
9. Floods— mesoscale... No (9)
10. Drought No (10)
V. Other:
1. Albedo Yes (5)
2. Surface roughness... No (6)
3. Topography changes. No (6)
Yes (7) 1-1000
No (5)
Yes (10) 1-10
Yes (10) 1-100
Yes (10) 1-10
Yes (10) 100-1000
Yes (10) 100-1000
No (6)
Yes (10)
Yes (10) 100 10-100
Yes (7) 15 100-1000
Yes(S) 20 100-10,000
Yes (6) 100 100-1000
Yes (10) 30 300-6000
Yes (10) 20 300-6000
Yes (10) Yes (10) 1-1000
No (8) Yes (9)
Yes (10) Yes (10) 1-1000
Yes (10) Yes (10) 1-1
N/A N/A
No (10) No (10)
No (10) No (8)
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
Yes (5) Yes (8) 100 10-100
Yes (5) Yes (8) 15 10-1000
No (8) Yes (5) 20 100-10,000
No (8) Yes (5) 100 100-1000
Yes (8) Yes (10) <5 300-6000
Yes (8) Yes (10) 20 300-6000
Yes (10) 10 100-3000 Yes (10) Yes (10) 10 100-3000
No (6) No (10) No (6)
Yes (10) ....
Yes (7) (i)
Yes (9) (■)
No(10) ....
N/A
100-60,000 Yes
40,000 Yes (7)
N/A
Yes
Yes (9)
100-60,000
40,000
No (10) No (10)
Yes (7) 0) 10,000 Yes (5)
Yes (6) No (6)
Yes (5) No (10)
Yes (5) No (9)
No (10) No (10)
Yes (6) No (9)
No (10) Yes (5)
Yes (7) 10,000
Yes (6)
Yes (5)
Yes (5)
No (3)
Yes (6)
Yes (6)
Yes (10)
Yes (6)
Yes (5)
Yes (5)
No (6)
No (6)
Yes (10)
Yes (6)
Yes (5) 10-100
1 Uncertain.
7 Farhar. Barbnra C. and Jack A. Clark. "Can Wp Modify the Weather? a Survey of
Scientists " Final report, vol. 3 (draft), Institute of Behavioral Science. University of Colo-
rado. Boulder, Colo.. January 1078. (Based on research supported by the National Science
Foundation under grants No*. ENV74-1R013 AOS. 01-35452, GI-44087. and BRT74-18613,
as part of "A Comparative Analysis of Public Support of and Resistance to Weather Modi-
fication Projects.") 89 pp.
* Ibid.
59
TABLE 2— ASSESSMENT OF THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT OF TWELVE WEATHER MODIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES
BASED UPON A SURVEY OF 551 WEATHER MODIFICATION SCIENTISTS
[From Farhar and Clark, 1978]
Operations1 Research 2 Neither Don't know Other
Per-
Per-
Per-
Per-
Per-
Total
Weather modification technology
cent
No.
cent
No.
cent
No.
cent
No.
cent
No.
No.
Cold fog dispersal
78
406
8
42
0
1
14
72
0
0
521
Precipitation enhancement, winter oro-
Do
c
D
1 1
1 1
R7
u
1
1
Precipitation enhancement, winter oro-
graphic, maritime
64
337
22
113
5
13
70
0
1
526
Hail suppression
46
244
49
256
4
4
23
0
1
528
Precipitation enhancement, summer convec-
tive, continental .
43
227
49
258
10
6
31
0
1
527
Precipitation enhancement, summer convec-
tive, maritime
42
220
46
244
5
11
56
0
2
529
Warm fog dispersal...
33
170
48
253
3
18
92
0
0
518
Precipitation enhancement with hail sup-
pression
30
156
56
288
2
12
12
62
0
1
519
Precipitation enhancement, general storms..
25
128
58
300
5
28
12
64
0
2
522
Lightning suppression
8
42
65
332
4
22
23
119
0
0
515
Hurricane suppression
4
19
75
388
4
23
17
88
0
2
520
Severe storm mitigation
3
13
68
353
9
47
20
101
0
1
515
1 This category is a combination of two responses: "The technology is ready for operational application" and "The
technology can be effectively applied; research should continue."
2 This category is a combination of two responses: "The technology is ready for field research only" and "The technology
should remain at the level of laboratory research."
60
61
CLASSIFICATION OF WEATHER MODIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES
In a previous review of weather modification for the Congress, three
possible classifications of activities were identified — these classifica-
tions were in accordance with (1) the nature of the atmospheric proc-
esses to be modified, (2) the agent or mechanism used to trigger or
bring about the modification, or (3) the scale or dimensions of the
region in which the modification is attempted.9 The third classifica-
tion was chosen in that study, where the three scales considered were
the microscale (horizontal distances, generally less than 15 kilometers) ,
the mesoscale (horizontal distances generally between 15 and 200
kilometers), and the macroscale (horizontal distances generally
greater than 200 kilometers).10 Examples of modification of processes
on each of these three scales are listed in table 4, data in which are
from Hartman.11 Activities listed in the table are illustrative only,
and there is no intent to indicate that these technologies have been
developed, or even attempted in the case of the listed macroscale
processes.
TABLE 4.— WEATHER AND CLIMATE MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO THE SCALE OR
DIMENSIONS OF THE REGION IN WHICH THE MODIFICATION IS ATTEMPTED
[Information from Hartman, 19661
Scale Horizontal dimensions Examples of modification processes
Microscale Less than 15 km
Mesoscale 15 to 200 km.
Macroscale Greater than 200 km.
Modification of human microclimates.
Modification of plant microclimates.
Evaporation suppression.
Fog dissipation.
Cloud dissipation.
Hail prevention.
Precipitation through individual cloud modification.
Precipitation from cloud systems.
Hurricane modification.
Modification of tornado systems.
Changes to global atmospheric circulation patterns.
Melting the Arctic icecap.
Diverting ocean currents.
In this chapter the characteristics and status of weather modifica-
tion activities will be classified and discussed according to the nature
of the processes to be modified. This seems appropriate since such a
breakdown is more consonant with the manner the subject has been
popularly discussed and debated, and it is consistent with the direc-
tions in which various operational and research activities have moved.
Classification by the second criterion above, that is, by triggering
agent or mechanism, focuses on technical details of weather modi-
fication, not of chief interest to the public or the policymaker, although
these details will be noted from time to time in connection with dis-
cussion of the various weather modification activities.
In the following major section, then, discussion of the principles
and the status of planned weather modification will be divided accord-
9 Hartman. Lawton M.. "Characteristics and Scope of Weather Modification. In U.S.
Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce. "Weather Modification and Control," TV ashing-
ton. D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office. 1966. (89th Cone:.. 2d sess., Senate Kept. JSo.
1139. prepared by the Legislative Reference Service, Library of Congress), p. 20.
10 Ibid.
" Ibid., pp. 21-31.
34-857 O - 79 - 7
62
ing to the major broad categories of phenomena to be modified; these
will include :
Precipitation augmentation.
Hail suppression.
Fog dissipation.
Lightning suppression.
Severe storm mitigation.
In subsequent major sections of this chapter there are reviews of
some of the specific technical problem areas common to most weather
modification activities and a summary of recommenced research
activities.
In addition to the intentional changes to atmospheric phenomena
discussed in this chapter, it is clear that weather and climate have also
been modified inadvertently as the result of man's activities and that
modification can also be brought about through a number of natur-
ally occurring processes. These unintentional aspects of weather and
climate modification will be addressed in the following chapter of
this report.12
Principles and Status of Weather Modification Technologies
Before discussing the status and technologies for modification of
precipitation, hail, fog, lightning, and hurricanes, it may be useful to
consider briefly the basic concepts of cloud modification. The two major
principles involved are (1) colloidal instability and (2) dynamic ef-
fects. Stanley Changnon describes how each of these principles can
be effective in bringing about desired changes to the atmosphere : 13
Altering colloidal stability. — The physical basis for most weather modification
operations has been the belief that seeding with certain elements would produce
colloidal instability in clouds, either prematurely, to a greater degree, or with
greater efficiency than in nature. Most cloud seeding presumes that at least a por-
tion of the treated cloud is supercooled, that nature is not producing any or
enough ice at that temperature of the cloud, and that treatment with chemical
agents of refrigerants will change a proportion of the cloud to ice. The resultant
mixture of water and ice is unstable and there is a rapid deposition of water
vapor upon the ice and a simultaneous evaporation of water from the super-
cooled droplets in the cold part of the cloud. The ice crystals so formed become
sufficiently large to fall relative to remaining droplets, and growth by collection
enhances the probability that particles of ice or water will grow to be large
enough to fall from the cloud and become precipitation.
This process of precipitation enhancement using ice nucleants has been dem-
onstrated for the stratiform type cloud, and generally for those which are oro-
graphically-produced and supercooled. Cumulus clouds in a few regions of the
United States have also been examined for the potential of colloidal instability in
their supercooled portions. This has been founded on beliefs that precipitation
(1) can be initiated earlier than by natural causes, or (2) can be produced from
a cloud which was too small to produce precipitation naturally.
Seeding in the warm portion of the cloud, or in "warm clouds" (below the
freezing level), has also been attempted so as to alter their colloidal instability.
Warm-cloud seeding has primarily attempted to provide the large droplets neces-
sary to initiate the coalescence mechanism, and is of value in clouds where insuffi-
cient large drops exist. In general alteration of the coalescence process primarily
precipitates out the liquid water naturally present in a cloud, whereas the ice-
crystal seeding process also causes a release of latent energy that conceivably
results in an intensification of the storm, greater cloud growth, and additional
precipitation.
Alirrhifj cloud dynamics. — The effects to alter the colloidal instability of
clouds, or their microphysical processes, have been based on the concept of rain
1L' Sof p. 145.
13 Chnncrnon. Stanley A.. Jr. "Prosont and Future of Woathor Modification ; Peprtonal
Issues." The Journal of Woathor Mortification, vol. 7. No. 1, April 1075, pp. 154-156.
63
increase through increasing the precipitation efficiency of the cloud. Simpson
and Dennis (1972) showed that alterations of cloud size and duration by "dynam-
ic modification" could produce much more total rainfall than just altering the
precipitation efficiency of the single cloud. In relation to cumulus clouds,
"dynamic seeding" simply represents alteration one step beyond that sought
in the principle of changing the colloidal stability. In most dynamic seeding
efforts, the same agents are introduced into the storm but often with a greater
concentration, and in the conversion of wrater to ice, enormous amounts of
latent heat are hopefully released producing a more vigorous cloud which will
attain a greater height with accompanying stronger updrafts, a longer life, and
more precipitation. Seeding to produce dynamic effects in cloud growth, whether
stratiform or cumuliform types, is relatively recent at least in its serious in-
vestigation, but it may become the most important technique. If through con-
trolled cloud seeding additional uplift can be produced, the productivity in terms
of rainfall will be higher whether the actual precipitation mechanism involved
is natural or artificial.
It has been proposed that the selective seeding of cumulus clouds also can
either (a) bring upon a merger of twTo or more adjacent clouds and a much
greater rainfall production through a longer-lived, larger cloud * * * or (b) pro-
duce eventually an organized line of clouds (through selective seeding of ran-
domized cumulus). The latter could allegedly be accomplished by minimizing and
organizing the energy into a few vigorous systems rather than a larger number of
isolated clouds.
Essentially, then, dynamic seeding is a label addressed to processes involved
in altering cloud microphysics in a selective and preferential way to bring
upon more rainfall through an alteration of the dynamical properties of the
cloud system leading to the development of stronger clouds and mesoscale
systems. Actually, dynamic effects might be produced in other ways such as
alterations of the surface characteristics to release heat, by the insertion of
chemical materials into dry layers of the atmosphere to form clouds, or by re-
distribution of precipitation through microphysical interactions in cloud processes.
The various seeding materials that have been used for cloud modi-
fication are intended, at least initially, to change the microphysical
cloud structure. Minute amounts of these materials are used with the
hope that selected concentrations delivered to specific portions of the
cloud will trigger the desired modifications, through a series of rapid
multiplicative reactions. Seeding materials most often used are classi-
fied as (1) ice nuclei, intended to enhance nucleation in the super-
cooled part of the cloud, or (2) hygroscopic materials, designed to
alter the coalescence process.14
Glaciation of the supercooled portions of clouds has been induced
by seeding with various materials. Dry ice injected into the subfreezing
part of a cloud or of a supercooled fog produces enormous numbers of
ice crystals. Artificial ice nuclei, with a crystal structure closely re-
sembling that of ice, usually silver iodide smoke particles, can also
produce glaciation in clouds and supercooled fogs. The organic fer-
tilizer, urea, can also induce artificial glaciation, even at temperatures
slightly warmer than freezing. Urea might also enhance coalescence in
warm clouds and warm fogs. Water spray and fine particles of sodium
chloride have also been used in hygroscopic seeding, intended to alter
the coalescence process. There have been attempts to produce co-
alescence in clouds or fog using artificial electrification, either with
chemicals that increase droplet combination by electrical forces, or
with surface arrays of charged wires whose discharges produce ions
which, attached to dust particles, may be transported to the clouds.15
Problems of cloud seeding technology and details of seeding deliv-
ery methods are discussed in a later section of this chapter, as are
14 Ibid., p. 156.
15 Ibid., pp. 156-157.
64
some proposed techniques for atmospheric modification that go beyond
cloud seeding.16
PRECIPITATION AUGMENTATION
The seeding of clouds to increase precipitation, either rainfall or
snowfall, is the best known and the most actively pursued weather
modification activity. Changes in clouds and precipitation in the
vicinity of cloud seeding operations have shown unquestionaBly that
it is possible to modify precipitation. There is evidence, however,
that such modification attempts do not always increase precipitation,
but that under some conditions precipitation may actually be de-
creased, or at best no net change may be effected over an area. Never-
theless, continued observations of clouds and precipitation, from both
seeded and nonseeded regions and from both experiments and com-
mercial operations, are beginning to provide valuable information
which will be useful for distinguishing those conditions for which
seeding increases, decreases, or has no apparent effect on precipita-
tion. These uncertainties were summarized in one of the conclusions
in a recent study on weather modification by the National Academy
of Sciences : 17
The Panel now concludes on the basis of statistical analysis of well-designed
field experiments that ice-nuclei seeding can sometimes lead to more precipita-
tion, can sometimes lead to less precipitation, and at other times the nuclei
have no effect, depending on the meteorological conditions. Recent evidence has
suggested that it is possible to specify those microphysical and mesophysical
properties of some cloud systems that determine their behavior following
artificial nucleation.
Precipitation enhancement has been attempted mostly for two gen-
eral types of cloud forms, both of which naturally provide precipita-
tion under somewhat different conditions. Convective or cumulus
clouds are those which are formed by rising, unstable air, brought
about by heating from below or cooling in the upper layers. Under
natural conditions cumulus clouds may develop into cumulo-nimbus
or "thunderheads," capable of producing heavy precipitation. Cu-
mulus clouds and convective systems produce a significant portion
of the rain in the United States, especially during critical growing
seasons. Attempts to augment this rainfall from cumulus clouds
under a variety of conditions have been underway for some years
with generally uncertain success. The other type of precipitation-
producing clouds of interest to weather modifiers are the orographic
clouds, those which are formed when horizontally moving moisture-
laden air is forced to rise over a mountain. As a result of the cooling
as the air rises, clouds form and precipitation often falls on the
windward side of the mountain. Through seeding operations, there
have been attempts to augment precipitation through acceleration
of this process, particularly in winter, in order to increase mountain
snowpack.
Figures 1 and 2 show regions of the coterminous United States
which are conducive to precipitation management through seeding
of spring and summer convective clouds and through seeding oro-
graphic cloud systems, respectively. The principles of precipitation
16 See pp. 115 and 129.
17 National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Committee on Atmospheric
Sciences, "Weather and Climate Modification : Problems and Progress," Washington, D.C.,
1973, p. 4.
65
enhancement for both cumulus and orographic clouds, and the present
state of knowledge and technology for such modification, are dis-
cussed in the following sections.
Figure 1. — Regions where preciptation management may be applied to enhance
rainfall from spring and summer showers.
Figure 2.— Regions where precipitation management may be applied to enhance
snowfall from winter orographic weather systems, thus augmenting spring and
summer runoff from mountain snowpacks.
66
Currmlus clouds
If air containing moisture is cooled sufficiently and if condensation
nuclei such as dust particles are present, precipitation may be pro-
duced. This process occurs when air is forced to rise by convection,
so that the water vapor condenses into clouds. Cumulus clouds are the
woolly vertical clouds with a flat base and somewhat rounded fop,
whose origin can always be traced to the convection process. They can
most often be observed during the summer and in latitudes of high
temperature. When updrafts become strong under the proper con-
ditions, cumulus clouds often develop into cumulonimbus clouds, the
principal producer of precipitation. About three-fourths of the rain
in the tropics and subtropics and a significant portion of that falling
on the United States is provided from cumulus clouds and convective
systems.
The science of cloud study, begun in the 1930's and greatly expanded
following World War II, includes two principal aspects — cloud micro-
physics and cloud dynamics. Though once approached separately by
different groups of scientists, these studies are now merging into a
single discipline. In cloud physics or microphysics the cloud parti-
cles— such as condensation and freezing nuclei, water droplets, and ice
crystals — are studied along with their origin, growth, and behavior.
Cloud dynamics is concerned with forces and motions in clouds, the
prediction of cloud structure, and the life cycle of updrafts and down-
drafts.18
For cloud modification purposes, present theories of microphysical
processes provide an ample basis for field seeding experiments ; how-
ever, further work is still needed on laboratory experiments, improved
instrumentation, and research on assumptions. On the other hand,
the processes in cloud dynamics are not completely understood and
require continued research.19
Most cumulus clouds evaporate before they have had opportunity
to produce precipitation at the Earth's surface. In fact many clouds
begin to dissipate at about the same time that rain emerges from their
bases, leading to the impression that they are destroyed by the forma-
tion of precipitation within them. This phenomenon is not yet fully
understood. Cumulus clouds have a life cycle; they are born, mature,
and eventually age and die. Small cumuli of the trade regions live only
about 5 to 10 minutes, while medium-sized ones exist for about 30 min-
utes. On the other hand, a giant cumulonimbus cloud in a hurricane
or squall line may be active for one to several hours. In its lifetime it
may exchange over 50 million tons of water, producing heavy rain,
lightning, and possibly hail. At all times, however, a cumulus cloud
struggles to exist; there is a precarious balance between the forces
aiding its growth and its destruction.20
The increasing capability to simulate cloud processes on the com-
puter has been a major advance toward understanding cloud modifi-
cation. The ways in which cloud microphysics influences convective
18 Simpson Joanne and Arnett S. Dennis, "Cumulus Clouds and Their Modification. In
Wilmot N. Hess (ed.), "Weather and Climate Modification." New York, John Wiley & Sons,
^'^Mo'schandreas, Demetrios J . and Irving Leichter. "Present Capabilities to Modify
Cumulus Clouds." Geomet. Inc. report No. EF-46.H. Final report for U.S. Navy Environ-
mental Prediction Research Facility, Mar. :U), 1976. p. 209. .
20 Simpson and Dennis, "Cumulus Clouds and Their Modification, 1947, pp. 234-23o.
67
dynamics are not well documented or modeled, however. Feedback
mechanisms are dynamic and thermodynamic. Dynamically, the buoy-
ancy is reduced by the weight of the particles formed within the
cloud, sometimes called "water loading/' Modeling suggests that
thermodynamic feedback from the microphysics can be even more
important, as evaporation at the edges of the cloud produces cooling
and thus induces downdrafts. Observations confirm this important
influence of evaporation, particularly where the cloud environment is
relatively dry, but the effect is minimized in humid tropical regions.21
Cumulus modification experiments
An enormous amount of energy is expended in natural atmospheric
processes. As much energy as the fusion energy of a hydrogen super-
bomb is released in a large thunderstorm, and in a moderate -strength
hurricane the equivalent of the energy of 400 bombs is converted each
clay. In his attempt to modify precipitation from clouds, man must
therefore look for some kind of a trigger mechanism by which such
energetically charged activities can be controlled, since he cannot hope
to provide even a fraction of the energy involved in the natural proc-
ess. A major problem in evaluating modification efforts is the large
natural variability in atmospheric phenomena. A cumulus cloud can,
in fact, do almost anything all by itself, without any attempt to mod-
ify its activity by man. This high variability has led the layman to
overestimate grossly what has been and can be done in weather modifi-
cation. In designing an experiment, this variability requires that there
be sound statistical controls.22
Precipitation is formed by somewhat different processes in warm
clouds and in subfreezing clouds. In the former, droplets are formed
from condensation of water vapor on condensation nuclei and grow
through collision and coalescence into raindrops. In subfreezing
clouds, such as the cumuli under discussion, supercooled water drop-
lets are attached to ice nuclei which grow into larger ice particles.
When large enough, these particles fall from the cloud as snow or sleet
or may be converted to rain if the temperature between the cloud and
the Earth's surface is sufficiently warm. Increasing precipitation
through artificial means is more readily accomplished in the case of
the subfreezing clouds. In addition, attempts have been made to pro-
mote the merging of cumulus clouds in order to develop larger cloud
systems which are capable of producing significantly more precipita-
tion than would be yielded by the individual small clouds.
Nearly all cumulus experiments have involved "seeding" the clouds
with some kind of small particles. Sometimes the particles are dis-
persed from the ground, using air currents to move them into the
clouds. Most often the materials are dispensed from aircraft, by releas-
ing them upwind of the target clouds, by dropping them into the cloud
top, by using the updraft from beneath the cloud, or by flying through
the cloud. Although more expensive, aircraft seeding permits more
accurate targeting and opportunity for measurements and observa-
tions. In the Soviet Union, cumulus clouds have been seeded success-
21 Simpson. Joanne, "Precipitation Augmentation from Cumulus Clouds and Systems :
Scientific and Technical Foundations." 1975. Advances in Geophysics, vol. 19. Xew York.
Academic Press, 1976. pp. 10-11.
122 Simpson and Dennis, "Cumulus Clouds and Their Modification," 1974, pp. 240-241.
68
fully with artillery shells and rockets, using radar to locate parts of
the clouds to be seeded.23
Augmentation of precipitation in cumulus clouds has been attempted
both by accelerating the coalescence process and by initiating ice parti-
cle growth in the presence of supercooled water. In fact, these processes
are essentially identical in cumuli where the tops extend above the
freezing level.
Prior to the 1960's nearly all supercooled seeding experiments and
operations were concerned with attempting to increase precipitation
efficiency, based on consideration of cloud microstructure.24 This is
essentially a static approach, intended to produce precipitation by in-
creasing the total number of condensation nuclei, through the intro-
duction of artificial nuclei injected by seeding into or under the clouds.
This approach has been moderately successful in convective storms
with conducive cloud microstructure in a number of locations — Cali-
fornia, Israel, Switzerland, and Australia — where clouds are often
composed of small supercooled droplets, typical of winter convection
and of continental air masses.25 On the other hand, the large cumulus
clouds originating in tropical and subtropical ocean regions, which are
evident over much of the eastern United States during the summer, are
much less influenced by this static approach. A technique known as
dynamic seeding has shown promise in enhancing precipitation from
clouds of this type.
According to dynamic seeding philosophy, the strength, size, and
duration of vertical currents within the cloud have stronger control on
cumulus precipitation than does the microstructure. In this technique,
first demonstrated in the 1960?s, the seeding provides artificial nuclei
around which supercooled water freezes, liberating large quantities of
latent heat of fusion, within the clouds, causing them to become more
buoyant and thus to grow to greater heights. This growth invigorates
circulation within the cloud, causes increased convergence at its base,
fosters more efficient processing of available moisture, and enhances
rainfall through processes by which cumuli ordinarily produce such
precipitation. Results of the Florida Area Cumulus Experiment
(FACE) , conducted by the U.S. Department of Commerce, seem to in-
dicate that dynamic seeding has been effective in increasing the sizes
and lifetimes of individual cumuli and the localized rainfall resulting
from them.20
Success thus far in rain enhancement from dynamic seeding of
cumulus has been demonstrated through seeding techniques applied
to single, isolated clouds. In addition to the experiments in Florida,
dynamic seeding of single clouds has been attempted in South Dakota,
Pennsylvania, Arizona, Australia, and Africa, with results similar to
those obtained in Florida.27 It appears, however, that a natural process
necessary for heavy and extensive convective rainfall is the merger
of cloud groups. Thus, this process of cloud merger must be promoted
in order for cloud seeding to be effective in augmenting rainfall from
23 Ibid., p. 242.
24 Ibid., 1974, pp. 246-247.
25 Ibid., p. 247. , - „
26 William L. Woodley. Joanne Simpson. Ronald Biondini, and Joyce Berkeley. "Rainfall
Results. 1970-I97.r> ; Florida Area Cumulus Experiment," Science, vol. ID'S. No. 4280. Feb. 2f>.
1077. p. 735.
-~ Simpson and Dennis, "Cumulus Clouds and Their Modification." 1974, p. 261.
69
cumulus clouds. The FACE experiment has been designed to investi-
gate whether dynamic seeding can induce such cloud merger and in-
creased rainfall.28 Area wide cumulus cloud seeding experiments are
also planned for the U.S. Department of the Interior's High Plains
Cooperative program (HIPLEX), being conducted in the Great
Plains region of the United States.29 30 There has been some indication
that desired merging has been accomplished in the Florida experi-
ment.31 Though this merging and other desirable effects may be
achieved for Florida cumulus, it must be established that such mergers
can also be induced for other connective systems which are found over
most of the United States east of the Great Plains. Changnon notes
that, "The techniques having the most promise for rain enhancement
from convective clouds have been developed for single, isolated types
of convective clouds. The techniques have been explored largely
through experimentation with isolated mountain-type storms or with
isolated semitropical storms. * * * Weather modification techniques
do not exist for enhancing precipitation from the multicellular con-
vective storms that produce 60 to 90 percent of the warm season
rainfall in the eastern two-thirds of the United States." 32
Effectiveness of precipitation enhancement research and operations
A major problem in any precipitation enhancement project is the
assessment of whether observed increases following seeding result from
such seeding or occur as part of the fluctuations in natural precipita-
tion not related to the seeding. This evaluation can be attempted
through observations of physical changes in the cloud system which
has been seeded and through statistical studies.
Physical evaluation requires theoretical and experimental investi-
gations of the dispersal of the seeding agent, the manner that seeding
has produced changes in cloud microstructure, and changes in gross
characteristics of a cloud or cloud system. Our understanding of the
precipitation process is not sufficient to allow us to predict the magni-
tude, location, and time of the start of precipitation. Hence, because
of this lack of detailed understanding and the high natural variability
of precipitation, it is necessary to use statistical methods as well. There
is a closer physical link between seeding and observable changes in
cloud microstructure ; however, even the latter can vary widely with
time and position in natural, unseeded clouds, so that statistical evalua-
tion is also required with regard to the measurement of these
quantities.33
It should first be determined whether the seeding agent reached
the intended region in the cloud with the desired concentration rather
^Woodley, et al.. "Rainfall Results, 1970-1975; Florida Area Cumulus Experiment,
1977. p. 735.
29 Bureau of Reclamation. U.S. Department of the Interior. "High Plains Cooperative
Program : Progress and Planning Report No. 2," Denver. March 1976. p. 5.
30 The history, purposes, organization, and participants in the FACE and HIPLEX pro-
grams are discussed along with other programs of Federal agencies in chapter o or tms
report. _ . L „
31 William L. Woodley and Robert I. Sax. "The Florida Area Cumulus Experiment : Ka-
tionale. Design. Procedures. Results, and Future Course." U.S. Department of Commerce.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Research Laboratories.
NOAA technical report ERL 354-WMPO 6. Boulder, Colo., January 19 , 6 pp. 41-4o.
32 Changnon, Stanley A.. Jr., "Present and Future of Weather Modification : Regional
ISS33JWarn9e7r°'jPP'"Th9e ~Deteetabilitv of the Effects of Seeding." In World Meteorological Or-
ganization. Weather Modification Programme, position papers used in the Preparation of
the plan for the Precipitation Enhancement Experiment (PEP), Precipitation Enhancement
Project Report No. 2. Geneva, November 1976, annex I, p. 43.
70
than spreading into other areas selected as controls. When the agent
has been delivered by aircraft, this problem is usually minimized,
though even in this case, it is desirable to learn how the material has
diffused through the cloud. When ground-based seeding generators
are used, the diffusion of the material should be studied both by
theoretical studies and by field measurements. Such measurements
may be made on the seeding agent itself or on some trace material
released either with the seeding agent or separately ; this latter might
be either a fluorescent material such as zinc sulphide or any of various
radioactive materials. Sometimes the tracer might be tracked in the
cloud itself, while in other experiments it may be sufficient to track
it in the precipitation at the surface.34
In looking for cloud changes resulting from seeding, the natural
cloud behavior is needed as a reference; however, since the character-
istics of natural clouds vary so widely, it is necessary to observe a
number of different aspects of the properties and behavior of seeded
clouds against similar studies of unseeded clouds in order to be able
^o differentiate between the two. It is further desirable to relate such
behavior being studied to predictions from conceptual and numerical
models, if possible. Direct observations should be augmented by radar
studies, but such studies should substitute for the direct measurements
only when the latter are not possible.35
A statistical evaluation is usually a study of the magnitude of the
precipitation in the seeded target area in terms of its departure from
the expected value. The expected quantity can either be determined
from past precipitation records or through experimental controls. Such
controls are established by dividing the experimental time available
roughly in half into periods of seeding and nonseeding, on a random
basis. The periods may be as short as a day or be 1 or 2 weeks in dura-
tion. The precipitation measured during the unseeded period is used as
a measure of what might be expected in the seeded periods if seeding
hadn't occurred. In another technique, control areas are selected where
precipitation is highly correlated with that in the target area but
which are never seeded. The target area is seeded on a random basis
and its rainfall is compared with that of the control area for both
seeded and unseeded periods. Another possibility includes the use of
two areas, either of which may be chosen for seeding on a random basis.
Comparisons are then made of the ratio of precipitation in the lirst
area to that in the second with the first area seeded to the same ratio
when the second is also seeded. There are many variations of these
basic statistical designs, the particular one being used in a given experi-
ment depending on the nature of the site and the measuring facilities
available. As with the seeding techniques employed and the physical
measurements which are made, experimental design can only be final-
ized after a site has been selected and its characteristics studied.36
Results achieved through cumulus modification
Cumulus modification is one of the most challenging and controver-
sial areas in weather modification. In some cases randomized seeding
efforts in southern California and in Israel have produced significant
Ibid., p. 44.
33 Ibid.
M Ibid., p. 47).
71
precipitation from bands of winter cyclonic storms. However, attempts
have been less promising in attributing increased rain during summer
conditions to definitive experiments. There has been some success in
isolated tropical cumuli, where seeding has produced an increase in
cloud height and as much as a twofold to threefold increase in rain-
fall.37
In the Florida area cumulus experiment (FACE), the effects on
precipitation over a target area in southern Florida as a result of
seeding cumuli moving over the area is being studied under the spon-
sorship of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA). Analysis of the data from 48 days of experimentation
through 1975 provided no evidence that rainfall over the fixed target
area of 13,000 square kilometers had been altered appreciably from
dynamic seeding. On the other hand, there is positive evidence for
increased precipitation from seeding for clouds moving through the
area.38
When FACE data from the 1976 season are combined with previous
data, however, increasing the total number of experimental days to 75,
analysis shows that dynamic seeding under appropriate atmospheric
conditions was effective in increasing the growth and rain production
of individual cumulus clouds, in inducing cloud merger, and in pro-
ducing rainfall increases from groups of convective clouds as they
pass through the target area. A net increase seemed to result from the
•seeding when rainfall on the total target area is averaged.39
Further discussion of FACE purposes and results is found under
the summary of weather modification programs of the Department of
Commerce in chapter 5.40
Recent advances in cumulus cloud modification
In the past few years some major advances have been achieved in
cumulus experimentation and in improvement of scientific under-
standing. There has been progress in (1) numerical simulation of
cumulus processes and patterning; (2) measurement techniques; (3)
testing, tracing, delivery, and targeting of seeding materials; and (4)
application of statistical tools. Recognition of the extreme difficulty of
cumulus modification and the increased concept of an overall systems
approach to cumulus experimentation have also been major advances.41
Orographic clouds and precipitation
In addition to the convection clouds, formed from surface heating,
clouds can also be formed when moist air is lifted above mountains
as it is forced to move horizontally. As a result, rain or snow may fall,
and such precipitation is said to be orographic, or mountain induced.
The precipitation results from the cooling within the cloud and charac-
37 Sax. R. I.. S. A. Changnon. L. O. Grant. W. F. Hitschfeld. P. V. Hobbs. A. M. Kanan.
and J. Simnson, "Weather Modification: Where Are We Now and Where Should \\ e Be
Going? An Editorial Overview." Journal of Applied Meteorology, vol. 14. No. o, August 1975,
P- 662.
38 Woodlev, et al., "Rainfall Results, 1970-1975 ; Florida Area Cumulus Experiment.
1977. p. 742. , „ . .
^Woodley. William L.. Joanne Simpson. Ronald Biondini. and Jill Jordan. NOAA s
Florida Area Cumulus Experiment; Rainfall Results. 1970-1976 " In preprints from the
Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification, Champaign, 111..
Oct. 10-13. 1977. Boston, American Meteorological Society, 1977, p. 209.
40 gee p 292
41 Sax. et.' ai. "Weather Modification : Where Are We Now and Where Should We Be
Going? An Editorial Overview," 1975, p. 663.
72
teristically falls on the windward side of the mountain. As the air
descends on the leeward side of the mountain, there is warming and
dissipation of the clouds, so that the effect of the mountains is to pro-
duce a "rain shadow" or desert area. The Sierra Nevada in western
North America provide such conditions for orographic rain and snow
along the Pacific coast and a rain shadow east of the mountains when
moisture laden air generally flows from the Pacific eastward across
this range.
The western United States is a primary area with potential for
precipitation augmentation from orographic clouds. This region re-
ceives much of its annual precipitation from orographic clouds during
winter, and nearly all of the rivers start in the mountains, deriving
their water from melting snowpacks. The major limitation on agricul-
ture here is the water supply, so that additional water from increased
precipitation is extremely valuable. Streamflow from melting snow
is also important for the production of hydroelectric power, so that
augmentation of precipitation during years of abnormally low natural
snowfall could be valuable in maintaining required water levels neces-
sary for operation of this power resource. Orographic clouds provide
more than 90 percent of the annual runoff in many sections of the
western United States.42
Figure 3 (a) and (b) are satellite pictures showing the contrast
between the snow cover over the Sierra Nevada on April 28, 1975, and
on April 19, 1977. This is a graphical illustration of why much of Cali-
fornia was drought stricken during 1977. The snowpack which custo-
marily persists in the highest elevations of the Sierras until July had
disappeared by mid-May in 1977.43
The greatest potential for modification exists in the winter in this
region, while requirements for water reach their peak in the summer ;
hence, water storage is critical. Fortunately, the snowpack provides a
most effective storage, and in some places the snowmelt lasts until early
July. Water from the snowmelt can be used directly for hydroelectric
power generation or for irrigation in the more arid regions, while
some can be stored in reservoirs for use during later months or in sub-
sequent dry years. In some regions where the snowpack storage is not
optimum, offseason orographic precipitation is still of great value,
since the water holding capacity of the soil is never reached and addi-
tional moisture can be held in the soil for the following groAving season.
Orographic clouds are formed as moist air is forced upward hy
underlying terrain. The air thus lifted, containing water vapor, cools
and expands. If this lifting and cooling continue, the air parcels will
frequently reach sal mat ion. If the air becomes slightly supersaturated,
small droplets begin to form by condensation, and a cloud develops,
which seems to hang over the mountain peak. The location where this
condensation occurs can be observed visually by the edge of the cloud
on the windward side of the mountain. Upon descent in the lee of the
mountain the temperature and vapor capacity of the air parcel again
"Grant, Lewis O. and Archie M. Kahan, "Weather Modification for Augmenting Oro-
graphic Precipitation." In Wilmot N. Hess (editor), "Weather and Climate Modification,"
New York. Wiley. 1974. p. 2S5.
4:1 U.S. Department of Commerce, news release, NOAA 77-234. NO A A Public Affairs Office,
Rockville, Md., Aug. 17, 1077.
73
increase, so that any remaining liquid droplets or ice crystals
evaporate.44
(a) April 28, 1975
Figure 3. — NOAA-3 satellite pictures of the snowcover on the Sierra Nevada
Mountains in (a) April 1975 and (b) April 1977. (Courtesy of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.)
44 Sax. et al.. "Weather Mortification : Where Are We Now and Where Should We Be
Going?" an editorial overview, 1975, pp. 657-658.
74
]
(b) April 19, 1977
The supercooled cloud droplets exist as liquid at temperatures down
to about -20° C ; but at temperatures colder than -20° C, small ice
crystals begin to form around nuclei that are naturally present in the
atmosphere. Once formed, the ice crystals grow rapidly because the
saturation vapor pressure over ice is less than that over water. As the
crystals increase they may fall and eventually may reach the ground
as snow. The temperature at the top of the cloud is an important
factor in winter storms over mountains, since natural ice crystals will
not form in large quantities if the cloud top is warmer than —20° C.
If the temperature is below —20° C, however, a large fraction of the
cloud particles will fall as snow from natural processes.45
45 Weisbecker, Leo W. (compiler), "The Impacts of Snow Enhancement; Technology
Assessment of Winter Orographic Snowpack Augmentation in the Upper Colorado River
Basin," Norman, Okla., University of Oklahoma Press, 1974, pp. 64-66.
75
Orographic precipitation modification
According to Grant and Kalian, " * * * research has shown that
orographic clouds * * * provide one of the most productive and
manageable sources for beneficial weather modification." 46 In a re-
cent study by the National Academy of Sciences, it was concluded
broadly that orographic clouds provide one of the "main possibilities
of precipitation augmentation,*' based on the considerations below : 47
A supply of cloud water that is not naturally converted into
precipitation sometimes exists for extended periods of time ;
Efficient seeding agents and devices are available for treating
these clouds;
Seeding agents can sometimes (not always) be delivered to
the proper cloud location in proper concentrations and at the
proper time;
Microphysical cloud changes of the type expected and neces-
sary for seeding have been demonstrated;
Substantial increases in precipitation with high statistical sig-
nificance have been achieved in some well-designed randomized
experiments for clouds that, based on physical concepts, should
have seeding potential; and
Augmentation of orographic precipitation can have great eco-
nomic potential.
Although natural ice crystals will not form in sufficient numbers if
the cloud top is warmer than —20° C, it has been shown that particles
of silver iodide smoke will behave as ice nuclei at temperatures some-
what warmer than — 20° C, so that ice crystals can be produced by such
artificial nuclei in clouds with temperatures in the range of —10° to
— 20° C. Whereas in the natural state, with few active nuclei at these
temperatures, the cloud particles tend to remain as water droplets,
introduction of the silver iodide can quickly convert the supercooled
cloud into ice crystals. Then, the natural growth processes allow the
crystals to grow to sufficient size for precipitation as snow.48
Meteorological factors which favor increased snowfall from oro-
graphic clouds through cloud seeding are summarized by
Weisbecker : 49
The component of the airflow perpendicular to the mountain
ridge must be relatively strong.
The air must have a high moisture content. Generally, high
moisture is associated with above-normal temperatures.
The cloud, including its upper boundary, should be at a temp-
erature warmer than — 20° C. Since temperature decreases with
increasing altitude, this temperature criterion limits the altitude
of the cloud top. However, it is advantageous for the cloud base
to be low, since the water droplet content of the cloud will then
be relatively large.
46 Grant and Kahan, "Weather Modification for Augmenting Orographic Precipitation,"
1974. p. 282.
*7 Committee on Climate and Weather Fluctuations and Agricultural Production, National
Research Council, "Climate and Food ; Climatic Fluctuation and U.S. Agricultural Produc-
tion." National Academy of Sciences. Washington, D.C., 1976, p. 136.
48 Weisbecker, "The Impacts of Snow Enhancement ; Technology Assessment of Winter
Orographic Snowpack Augmentation in the Upper Colorado Basin," 1974, p. 66.
» Ibid. pp. 66-67.
76
It must be possible to disperse silver iodide particles within the
cloud in appropriate numbers to serve as ice crystal nuclei. If
ground generators are used, the silver iodide smoke must be dif-
fused by turbulence and lifted by the airflow into cloud regions
where temperatures are colder than — 10° C.
The ice crystals must have time to grow to a precipitable size
and to fall to Earth before reaching the downdrafts that exist on
the far side of the mountain ridge.
The meteorological conditions which are ideally suited for augment-
ing artificially the snowfall from a layer of orographic clouds are
depicted in figure 4. The figure also shows the optimum location of
ground-based silver iodide smoke generators upwind of the target area
as well as the spreading of the silver iodide plume throughout the cloud
by turbulent mixing. Although there are several seeding agents with
suitable properties for artificial ice nuclei, silver iodide and lead iodide
appear to be most effective. Owing to the poisonous effects of lead com-
pounds, lead iodide has not had wide use. The optimum silver iodide
particle concentration is a function of the temperature, moisture, and
vertical currents in the atmosphere ; it appears to be in the range from
5 to 100 nuclei per liter of cloud.50 While the most common means of
dispersing silver iodide in mountainous areas is by ground-based gen-
erators, other methods of cloud seeding make use of aircraft, rockets,
and balloons.
In contrast to convective clouds, ice crystal formation in orographic
clouds is thought to be static, depending primarily on cloud micro-
physics, and that orographic cloud seeding has little effect on the
general patterns of wind, pressure, and temperature. On the other
hand, clouds formed primarily by convection, such as summer cumulus
or hurricane clouds, are believed to be affected dynamically by seeding
as noted above in the discussion of modification of convective clouds.51
Since the lifting of the air in winter mountain storms is mainly caused
by its passage over the mountain barrier, the release of latent energy
accompanying this lifting has little effect upon the updraft itself. In
convective cases, however, heat released through seeding increases
buoyancy and lifting, with attendant effects on the wind and pressure
fields. The static nature of the processes involved in orographic cloud
modification therefore suggests that there is less chance that the storm
dynamics downwind of the target area will be altered appreciably as a
result of the modification activities.52
60 Ibid., p. 68.
si See p. 68.
52 Ibid., pp. 70-71.
77
Figure 4. — Idealized model showing meteorological conditions that should lead
to increased snowfall if clouds are seeded with silver iodide particles. (From
Weisbecker, 1974.)
Orographic seeding experiments and seeddbility criteria
A randomized research weather modification program with winter
orographic storms in central Colorado was initiated by Colorado State
University in 1959. Data on precipitation and cloud physics were col-
lected for 16 years under this Climax program, named for the location
of its target area near Climax, Colo. Analysis of data has shown pre-
cipitation increases between 100 and 200 percent when the average
temperatures of seeded clouds at the 500 millibar level were — 20°C or
warmer. When corresponding temperatures were — 26°C to — 21°C,
precipitation changes ranged between —5 and +6 percent. For tem-
peratures colder than — 26°C, seeded cloud systems produced decreases
in precipitation ranging from 22 to 46 percent.53
While the results of Climax have provided some useful guidelines in
establishing seedability criteria of certain cloud systems, it has been
learned from other experimental programs that direct transfer of the
Climax criteria to other areas is not warranted.54 In particular, this
nontransferability has been evident in connection with analysis of re-
sults from the Colorado River Basin Pilot Project, conducted from
1970 through 1975 in the San Juan Mountains of southwest Colorado,
sponsored by the Bureau of .Reclamation of the U.S. Department of
the Interior.55
Difficulties are frequently encountered in attempting to evaluate ex-
perimental cloud-seeding programs. A major problem in assessing
results of all cold orographic cloud-seeding projects stems from the
high natural variability of cloud properties. Frequent measurements
are therefore required in order to monitor these properties carefully
and consistently throughout the experiment. Another set of problems
which have troubled investigators in a number of experimental pro-
grams follow from improper design. Such a deficiency can easily re-
53Hjermstad. Lawrence M.. "San Juan and Climax." In proceedings of Special Weather
Modification Conference; Augmentation of Winter Orographic Precipitation in the West-
ern United States, San Francisco, Nov. 11-13, 1975, Boston, American Meteorological
Society. 1975, p. 1 (abstract).
~4Ibid., pp. 7-S. . ...
53 This nroiect. part of Project Skywater of the Bureau of Reclamation, is discussed along
with other programs of Federal agencies in chapter 5 of this report, see p. 2o4.
34-857 O - 79 - 8
78
suit, for example, if insufficient physical measurements have been taken
prior to establishment of the design of the experiment.56
Under Project Sky water the Bureau of Reclamation has carried out
an analysis of data from seven past weather modification projects in
order to identify criteria which define conditions when cloud seeding
will increase winter snowfall in mountainous terrain and when such
seeding would have no effect or decrease precipitation. The seven
projects examined in the study were conducted in the Rocky Moun-
tains, in the Sierra Nevada, and in the southern coast range in Cali-
fornia during the 1960's and 1970?s, in areas which represent a wide
range of meteorological and topographical conditions.57
Figure 5 shows the locations of the seven projects whose results were
analyzed in the Skywater study, and table 5 includes more detailed
information on the locations and dates of seeding operations for these
projects. General seedability criteria derived from this study were
common to all seven projects, with the expectation that the criteria
will also be applicable to all winter orographic cloud-seeding projects.
While there have been other efforts to integrate results from several
projects into generalized criteria, based only on a few meteorological
variables, Vardiman and Moore considered 11 variables which depend
on mountain barrier shapes and sizes and on characteristics of the
clouds. Some of these variables are physically measurable while others
are derived from simple computations.58
Figure 5. — Locations of winter orographic weather modification projects whose
results were used to determine generalized cloud seeding criteria. (From Vardi-
man and Moore, 1977.
MHobbs. Peter V, "Evaluation of Cloud Seeding Experiments; Some Lessons To Be
i.earned From the Cascade and San Juan Projects." In proceedings of Special Weather
Modification Conference ; Augmentation of Winter Orographic Precipitation in the West-
Society 1976 . af Francisco, Nov. 11-13, 1975. Boston, American Meteorological
"Vardiman. Tarry and James A. Moore. "Generalized Criteria for Seeiing Winter Oro-
graphic Cloudy' Skywater monograph No. 1, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of
133 -Division of Atmospheric Water Resources Management, Denver, July 1977.
■ Ibid., p. 15.
79
TABLE 5.— LIST OF WINTER OROGRAPHIC WEATHER MODIFICATION PROJECTS, GIVING SITES AND SEASONS OF
OPERATIONS, USED IN STUDY TO DETERMINE GENERALIZED CLOUD SEEDING CRITERIA
[From Vardiman and Moore, 1977]
Project Site Seeding operations
-
Bridger Range Project (BGR) Rocky Mountains, Montana 1969-70 to 1971-72 (3 seasons).
Climax Project (CMX) Rocky Mountains, Colorado 1960-61 to 1969-70 (10 seasons).
Colorado River Basin Pilot Project Rocky Mountains, Colorado 1970-71 to 1974-75 (5 seasons).
(CRB).
Central Sierra Research Experiment Sierra Nevada, California 1968-69 to 1972-73 (5 seasons).
(CSR).
Jemez Mountains Project (JMZ) Rocky Mountains, New Mexico 1968-69 to 1971-72 (4 seasons).
Pyramid Lake Pilot Project (PYR) Sierra Nevada, California/Nevada 1972-73 to 1974-75 (3 seasons).
Santa Barbara Project (SBA) Southern Coast Range, California 1967-68 to 1973-74(7 seasons).
Detailed analyses were conducted on four variables calculated from
topography and vertical distributions of temperature, moisture, and
winds. These are (1) the stability of the cloud, which is a measure of
the likelihood that seeding material will reach a level in the cloud
where it can effect the precipitation process; (2) the saturation mixing
ratio a£ cloudbase, a measure of the amount of water available for
conversion to precipitation; (3) the calculated cloud top temperature,
a measure of the number of natural ice nuclei available to start the
precipitation process; and (4) the calculated trajectory index, a meas-
ure of the time available for precipitation particles to form, grow, and
fall to the ground.59
Results of the study thus far are summarized below :
Seeding can increase precipitation at and near the mountain crest under the
following conditions:
Stable clouds with moderate water content, cloud top temperatures between
—10 and —30° C, and winds such that the precipitation particles would be
expected to fall at or near the crest of the mountain barrier.
Moderately unstable clouds with moderate-to-high water content, cloud
top temperatures between —10 and —30° C, and a crest trajectory for the pre-
cipitation.
Seeding appears to decrease precipitation across the entire mountain barrier
under the following condition:
Unstable clouds with low water content, cloud top temperatures less
than —30° C, and winds such that the precipitation particles would
be carried beyond the mountain crest and evaporate before reaching the
ground.*0
59 Bureau of Reclamation. Division of Atmospheric Water Resources Management, "Sum-
mary Report ; Generalized Criteria for Seeding Winter Orographic Clouds.'" Denver. March
1977, p. 1. (This is a summary of the report by Vardiman and Moore which is referenced
above. )
80 Ibid., pp. 1-2.
Rime ice conditions at sensing device which measures intensity of snowfall.
(Courtesy of the Bureau of Reclamation.)
81
Results quoted above represent only a portion of the analyses which
are to be carried out. Seeding "window" bounds must be refined, and
the expected effect must be converted into estimates of additional pre-
cipitation a target area might experience during a winter season. It is
very unlikely that observed effects could have occurred by chance in
view of the statistical tests which were applied to the data.61
Operational orographic seeding projects
For several decades commercial seeding of orographic clouds for
precipitation augmentation has been underway in the western United
States, sponsored by specific users which include utility companies,
agricultural groups, and State and local governments. Much of the
technology was developed in the late forties and early fifties by com-
mercial operators, with some improvements since. The basic technique
most often used involves release of silver iodide smoke, usually from
ground-based generators, along the upwind slopes of the mountain
where clouds are seeded, as shown schematically in figure 6. It is the
opinion of Grant and Kahan that this basic approach still appears
sound for seeding orographic clouds over many mountain barriers, but
that in all aspects of these operating programs, there have been "sub-
stantial improvements" as a result of research and development pro-
grams.62 They summarized the following major deficiencies of past
operational orographic seeding programs :
1. The lack of criteria for recognizing the seedability of specific
clouds.
2. The lack of specific information as to where the seeding
materials would go once they are released.
3. The lack of specific information as to downwind or broader
social and economic effects from the operations.
4. The lack of detailed information on the efficiency of seeding
generators and material being used for seeding clouds with differ-
ing temperatures.63
Figure 6. — Schematic view of silver iodide generators placed upwind from a tar-
get area in the mountains, where orographic clouds are to be seeded for pre-
cipitation enhancement (From Weisbecker, 1974.)
61 Ibid., p. 2.
63 Grant and Kalian, "Weather Modification for Augmenting Orographic Precipitation,"
1974, p. 307.
« Ibid., pp. 307-308.
82
Results achieved through orographic precipitation modification
Results from several projects in the western United States have
shown that winter precipitation increases of 10 to 15 percent are pos-
sible if all suitable storms are seeded.64 From randomized experiments
at Climax, Colo., precipitation increases of 70 to 80 percent have been
reported. These results, based on physical considerations, are repre-
sentative of cases which have a high potential for artificial
stimulation.65
64 U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, "Reclamation Research in the
Seventies," Second progress report. A water resources technical publication research report
No. 28, Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977, p. 2.
65 National Academy of Sciences, "Climate and Food ; Climatic Fluctuation and U.S. Agri-
cultural Production," 1976, p. 136.
83
84
HAIL SUPPRESSION
The hail problem
Along with floods, drought, and high winds, hail is one of the major
hazards to agriculture. Table 6 shows the estimated average annual
hail loss for various crops in the United States, for each of the 18
States whose total annual crop losses exceed $10 million. Also included
in the table are total losses for each crop and for each of the 18 States
and the aggregate of the remaining States.
The following vivid description of a hailstorm conveys both a sense
of its destructiveness and some notion of its capricious nature :
At the moment of its happening, a hailstorm can seem a most disastrous event.
Crashing stones, often deluged in rain and hurled to the surface by wind, can
create instant destruction. Picture windows may he broken, cars dented, or a
whole field of corn shredded before our eyes.
Then quite quickly, the storm is over. Xow the damage is before us. we per-
ceive it to be great, and we vow to do something to prevent its happening again.
But what we have experienced is "our" storm. Hail did not happen perhaps a
mile away. We may see another the same day. or never again. Thus, the concept
of hail suppression is founded in a real or perceived need, but the assessment of
this solution must be considered in terms of the nature of hail.06
TABLE 6.— ESTIMATED AVERAGE HAIL LOSSES BY CROP, FOR STATES WITH LOSSES GREATER THAN $10,000,000
[In millions of dollars]1
Fruits
Coarse
and veg-
State
Wheat
Corn
Soybeans
Cotton
Tobacco
grains2
etables
Total
Texas
16.7
1.5
49.1
16.1
2.8
86.2
Iowa..
.1
31.3
31.6
3.5
.3
66.8
Nebraska
16.8
27.2
4.1
4.7
7.7
60.5
Minnesota
2.3
17.6
18.7
7.5
2.2
48.3
Kansas
36.1
2.8
.9
4.7
1.3
45.8
North Dakota.
28.8
.6
.8
12.5
1.6
44.3
North Carolina
.2
.8
.3
.5
24.2
.1
1.9
28.0
Illinois
1.2
12.1
12.8
.5
.9
27.5
South Dakota
8.9
9.2
1.6
7.6
.1
27.4
Colorado
14.4
4.1
2.6
5.9
27.0
Montana
16.7
.1
5.0
2.2
24.0
Oklahoma
15.7
.2
.1
2.7
3.3
22.0
Kentucky.
.1
.4
15.9
.1
.3
16.8
Missouri
1.8
4.7
5.2
1.4
.3
.1
.7
14.2
South Carolina
.1
.6
1.1
1.7
6.4
.1
2.3
12.3
Idaho
2.6
.1
. 1
1.2
7.6
11.5
California
.2
.5
1.8
8.5
11.1
Indiana
.9
3.8
4.7
.4
.3
.7
10.8
Other States
8.4
7.8
7.6
18.3
17.9
15.1
20.4
95.5
Total
172.0
123.5
91.0
74.2
65.1
86.6
67.4
680.0
1 1973 production and price levels.
2 Coarse grains: Barley, rye, oats, sorghum.
Source: "National Hail Research Experiment" from Boone (1974).
A major characteristic of hail is its enormous variability in time,
space, and size. Some measure of this great variability is seen in figure
7, which shows the average annual number of days with hail at points
within the continental United States. The contours enclose points with
equal frequency of hail days.67
00 Chanson, Stanley A.. Jr.. Ray Jay Davis, Barbara C. Farhar. J. Eupene Haas, J.
Lorena Ivens. Marvin V. Jones, Donald A. Klein, Dean Mann. Griffith M. Morgan. Jr.. Steven
T. Sonka. Earl R. Swanson. C. Robert Taylor, and Jon Van Blokland. "Hail Suppression :
Impacts and Issues." Final report — "-Technology Assessment of the Suppression of Hail
fTASH ) ." Urbana, 111.. Illinois State Water Survey. April lt>77 (sponsored by the National
Science Foundation, Research Applied to National Needs Program), p. 9.
« Ibid.
85
Hail forms in the more active convective clouds, with large vertical
motions, where large quantities of water vapor condense under condi-
tions in which large ice particles can grow quickly. The kinds of con-
vective clouds from which hail can be formed include (1) supercells
(large, quasi-steady-state, convective storms, (2) multicell storms
(active convective storms with multiple cells), (3) organized convec-
tive storms of squall lines or fronts, and (4) unstable, highly convective
small cumuli (primarily occurring in spring). 68 While hail generally
occurs only in thunderstorms, yet only a small proportion of the world's
thunderstorms produce an appreciable amount of hail. Based upon sev-
eral related theories, the following desciption of the formation of hail
is typical :
Ice crystals or snowflakes, or clumps of snowflakes, which form above the
zone of freezing during a thunderstorm, fall through a stratum of supercooled
water droplets (that is, water droplets well below 0° O). The contact of the ice
or snow particles with the supercooled water droplets causes a film of ice to form
on the snow or ice pellet. The pellet may continue to fall a considerable distance
before it is carried up again by a strong vertical current into the stratum of
supercooled water droplets where another film of water covers it. This process
may be repeated many times until the pellet can no longer be supported by the
convective updraft and falls to the ground as hail.69
( Note: The lines enclose points (stations) that have equal frequency of hail days )
Figure 7. — Average annual number of days with hail at a point, for the contiguous
United States. (From Changnon, et al., TASH, 1977.)
68 National Academy of Sciences, "Climate and Food ; Climatic Fluctuation and U.S.
Agricultural Production." 1976. p. 141.
89 Koeppe. Clarence E. and George C. de Long, "Weather and Climate," New York, Mc-
Graw-Hill, 1958, pp. 79-80.
86
Modification of hail
According to D. Ray Booker, "Hail modification seeding has been
done operationally for decades in the high plains of the United States
and in other hail prone areas of the world. Thus, there appears to be a
significant market for a hail-reduction technology." 70 In the United
States most attempts at hail suppression are conducted by commercial
seeders who are under contract to State and county governments and to
community associations. There are also extensive hail suppression op-
erations underway in foreign countries. Although some successes are
reported, many important questions are still unanswered with regard
to mitigation of hail effects, owing largely to lack of a satisfactory
scheme for evaluation of results from these projects.
In theory, it should be possible to inhibit the formation of large
ice particles which constitute hailstones by seeding in order to increase
the number of freezing nuclei so that only smaller ice particles will
develop. This would then leave the cloud with insufficient precipita-
tion water to allow the accretion of supercooled droplets and the
formation of hail of damaging size. This simplistic rationale, how-
ever, does not provide insight into the many complications with
which artificial nail suppression is fraught ; nor does it explain the
seemingly capricious responses of hailstorms to seeding and the incon-
sistent results which characterize such modification attempts. As with
all convective systems, the processes involved are very complex. They
are controlled by the speed of movement of the air parcels and precipi-
tation particles, leading to complicated particle growth, evaporation,
and settling processes.71 As a result, according to Changnon, the con-
clusions from various hail suppression programs are less certain than
from those for attempts to enhance rain from convective clouds, and
they are best labeled "contradictory." 72
Changnon identifies two basic approaches that have been taken
toward hail modification :
»Most common has been the intensive, high rates of seeding of the potential
storm with silver iodide in an attempt to transform nearly all of the super-
cooled water into ice crystals, or to "glaciate" the upper portion of the clouds.
However, if only part of the supercooled water is transformed into ice, the
storm could actually be worsened since growth by accretion is especially rapid
in an environment composed of a mixture of supercooled drops and ice crystals.
Importantly, to be successful, this frequently used approach requires massive
seeding well in advance of the first hailstone formation.
The second major approach has been used in the Soviet Union and * * * in the
National Hail Research Experiment in Colorado. It involves massive seeding
with silver iodide, but only in the zone of maximum liquid water content of the
cloud. The hope is to create many hailstone embryos so that there will be in-
sufficient supercooled water available to enable growth to damaging stone sizes."
70 Booker, D. Ray, "A Marketing Approach to Weather Modification," background paper
prepared for the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board.
Feb. 20, 1977. p. 4.
i National Academy of Sciences, "Climate and Food; Climatic Fluctuation and U.S.
Agricultural Production." 1070. p. 143.
72 Changnon, "Present and Future of Weather Modification ; Regional Issues," 1975,
p. 102.
™ Ibid.
87
Precipitation instrument site, including, from left to right, hailcube, anemom-
eter, rain/hail separator, and Belfort weighing precipitation gage. (Courtesy of
the National Science Foundation. )
Hail seeding technologies
The most significant field programs in hail suppression during recent
years have included those conducted in the Soviet Union, in Alberta,
in South Africa, and in northeastern Colorado (the National Hail
Research Experiment). In the course of each of these projects, some
of which are still underway, various procedural changes have been
initiated. In all of them, except that in South Africa, the suppression
techniques are based on increasing the number of hail embryos by
88
seeding the cloud with ice nuclei. Usually, the seeding material is
silver iodide, but the Russians also use lead iodide, and on occasion
other agents such as sodium chloride and copper sulfate have been
used. The essential problems in seeding for hail suppression are re-
lated to how, when, and where to get the seeding agent into potential
hail clouds and how to identify such clouds.74
Soviet suppression techniques are based on their hypothesis that
rapid hail growth occurs in the "accumulation zone," just above the
level of maximum updraft, where liquid water content can be as
great as 40 grams per cubic meter. To get significant hail, the maximum
updraft should exceed 10 to 15 meters per second, and the temperature
in this zone must be between 0 and —25° C. Upper large droplets
freeze and grow, combining with lower large droplets, and an increase
in particle size from 0.1 cm to 2 or 3 cm can occur in only 4 to 5 minutes.
In the several Russian projects, the seeding agent is introduced at
selected cloud heights from rockets or antiaircraft shells ; the number
of volleys required and the position of injection being determined by
radar echo characteristics and past experience in a given operational
region.75
In other hail suppression projects, seeding is most frequently carried
out with aircraft, from which flares containing the seeding agent are
released by ejection or dropping. Each flare may contain up to 100
grams of silver iodide ; and the number used as well as the spacing and
height of ignition are determined from cloud characteristics as well as
past experience in a given experiment or operation. In each case it
is intended to inject the seeding material into the supercooled portion
of the cloud.
Evaluation of hail suppression technology
It appears that mitigation of the effects of hail has some promise,
based on the collection of total evidence from experiments and opera-
tions around the world. In the Soviet Union, scientists have been
reporting spectacular success (claims of 60 to 80 percent reduction)76
in hail suppression for nearly 15 years; however, their claims are not
universally accepted, since there has not been careful evaluation under
controlled conditions. Hail-seeding experiments have had mixed results
in other parts of the world, although a number of commercial seeders
have claimed success in hail damage reduction, but not with convincing
evidence.77
Successful hail suppression reports have come from a number of
operational programs in the United States as well as from weather
modification activities in the Soviet Union and in South Africa. Often
the validity of these results is questionable in view of deficiencies in
project design and data analysis; nevertheless, the cumulative evidence
suggests that hail suppression is feasible under certain conditions.
There are also reports of negative results, for example, in foreign pro-
grams and in the National Hail Research Experiment in the United
7*Chan*rnon. Stanlev A.. Jr.. and Griffith M. Moroni. Jr.. "Desipn of an Experiment To
Suppress Hail In Illinois." Illinois State Water Survey. TSWS/R 01 /7fi. RnHetln 01. State ot
Illinois. Department of Registration and Education, Urbana, 1970. pp. 82-S3.
75 Ibid., p. S3.
70 Chancrnon. "Present and Future of Weather Modification," 107". p 102.
77 Rattan. Louis J. statement submitted to Subcommittee on Environment and Atmos-
phere Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, at hearings.
June 18, 1970, pp. 7-8.
89
States, which indicate that under some conditions seeding induces
increased hail.78
Atlas notes that this apparent dichotomy has until recently been
attributed to different approaches to the techniques and rates of seed-
ing. However, lie observes that both positive and negative results
have been obtained using a variety of seeding methods, including
ground- and cloud-based generators, flares dropped from above the
cloud top, and injection by rockets and artillery.79 In discussing the
reasons for increased hail upon seeding, Atlas states :
There are at least four physical mechanisms by which seeding may produce
increased hail. Two of these occur in situations in which the rate of supply of
supercooled water exceeds that which can be effectively depleted by the com-
bination of natural and artificially produced hail embryos. This may occur in
supercell storms and in any cold-base storm in which the embryos are graupel
rather than frozen raindrops. Moreover, present seeding methods are much more
effective in warm-base situations in which the hail embryos are frozen raindrops.
Increased hail is also probable when partial glaciation of a cloud is produced
and the hail can grow more effectively upon the ice-water mixture than upon
the supercooled water alone. Similarly, increases in the amount of hail may
occur whenever the additional latent heat resulting from nucleation alters the
undraft profile in such a manner as to increase its maximum velocity or to
shift the peak velocity into the temperature range from —20° to —30° C, where
the accreted water can be more readily frozen. A probable associated effect is
the redistribution of precipitation loading by the combination of an alternation
in the updraft velocity and the particle sizes such that the hail embroyos may
grow for longer durations in a more favorable growth environment.80
Surreys of hail suppression effectiveness
Recently, Changnon collected information on the effectiveness of
hail suppression technology from three different kinds of sources. One
set of data was based on the results of the evaluations of six hail sup-
pression projects; another was the collection of the findings of three
published assessments of hail modification ; and the third was obtained
from two opinion surveys conducted among weather modification
scientists.81 The principal statistics on the estimated capabilities for
hail suppression from each of these groups of sources are summarized
in table 7. Where available, the estimated change in rainfall accom-
panying the hail modification estimates are also included. Such rain-
fall changes might have been sought intentionally as part of a hail sup-
pression activity or might result simply as a byproduct of the major
thrust in reducing hail. In the table, a plus sign* indicates an estimated
percentage increase in hail and/or rainfall while a minus sign signifies
a percentage decrease.
The six evaluations in part A of table 7 are from both experimental
and operational projects, each of which was conducted for at least 3
years in a single locale and in each of which aircraft seeding tech-
niques were used. Thus, the results of a number of earlier experiments,
using ground-based seeding generators, were not considered in the
estimations. Furthermore, change in hail due to suppression activities
was defined on the basis of crop-loss statistics rather than on the basis
of frequency of hail days, since Changnon does not consider the latter,
7S Atlas. David, "The Paradox of Hail Suppression," Science, vol. 195, No. 4274, Jan. 14.
1977. p. 195.
79 Ibid.
60 Ibid., pp 195-196.
81 Chanjrnon. Stanlev A.. Jr.. "On tbe Status of Hail Suppression." Bulletin of the Amer-
ican Meteorological Society, vol. 58, No. 1, Jan. 1977, pp. 20-28.
90
along with other criteria such as number and size of hailstones, hail
mass, and radar echo characteristics, to be a reliable indicator.82 Note
that five of the six projects listed indicate a hail suppression capability
ranging from 20 percent to 48 percent. Changnon notes, however, that
most of these results are not statistically significant at the 5 percent
level, but that most scientists would classify the results as "opti-
mistic." 83
Table 7— Status of Hail Suppression and Related Rainfall Modification
(Based on information from Changnon. On the Status of Hail Suppression.
1977.)
A. BEST ESTIMATES FROM PROJECT EVALUATIONS
1. Texas: Hail modification was —48 percent (crop-loss cost value) ; no change
in rainfall.
2. Southwestern North Dakota : Hail modification was —32 percent (crop-hail
insurance rates) ; no rain change information available.
3. North Dakota pilot project : Hail modification was —30 percent (a composite
of hail characteristics, radar, and crop-loss data) ; change in rainfall was +23
percent.
4. South Africa : Hail modification was —40 percent (crop-loss severity ;
change in rainfall was —4 percent.
5. South Dakota "Statewide" project : Hail modification was —20 percent
(crop loss) ; increase in rainfall was +? percent.
6. National hail research experiment in Colorado :
Increase in hail mass was +4 percent to +23 percent, with median of
+23 percent :
Increase in rainfall was +25 percent.
B. PUBLISHED ASSESSMENTS
1. American Meteorological Society : Positive but unsubstantiated claims and
growing optimism.
2. National Academy of Sciences: 30 to 50 percent reductions in U.S.S.R. and
15 percent decreases in France — neither result proven by experimentation.
3. Colorado State University Workshop :
—30 percent modification nationwide ;
—30 percent modification in the High Plains, with ± 10-percent change in
rain ; unknown results in the Midwest ; also unknown rainfall effects.
C. OPINION SURVEYS ('MEDIAN VALUES;
1. Farhar-Grant questionnaire (214 answers) : —25 percent crop-hail damage
nationwide, although majority — 59 percent — admit they do not know.
2. Illinois State Water Survey questionnaire (63 answers) :
—30 percent hail loss, with +15 percent rain increasein the Great Plains:
—20 percent hail loss, with +10 percent rain increase in the Midwest.
The results, shown in part B of table 7, from the recent published
assessments of capability in hail suppression reveal a position of
"guarded optimism;" however, there is no indication of definitive
proof of hail suppression contained in those assessments.84 These pub-
lished assessments are comprised of a statement, on the status of
weather modification by the American Meteorological Society,85 the
conclusions of a study on the progress of weather modification by the
82 Ibid., p. 22.
*»Th1rt.. p. 26.
"* Ibid.
" American Meteorological Society. "Policy Statement of tbo American Meteorological
Rocietv on Purposeful and Inadvertent Modifier Hon of Woatbcr nnd Climate," Bulletin of
tbo American Meteorological Society, vol. ,r)4. No. 7, July 1073. pp. 694-695.
91
National Academy of Sciences,86 and a report on a workshop at Colo-
rado State University on weather modification and 'agriculture.87
The third view (part C, table 7) resulting from two opinion surveys,
indicates wide-ranging but basically "bipolar" attitudes among the
scientists surveyed. The majority of the experts queried felt that a hail
suppression capability could not be identified; however, a sizable
minority were of the opinion that a moderate capability for modifying
hail (greater than 20-percent decrease) does now exist. Changnon says
that the results of these opinion surveys show at best that the con-
sensus must be considered to be a pessimistic view of a hail suppres-
sion capability.88
In his conclusions on the status of hail suppression technology,
Changnon states :
These three views of the current status of hail suppression, labeled as (1) opti-
mistic, (2) slightly optimistic, and (3) pessimistic, reflect a wide range of opin-
ion and results. Clearly, the present status of hail suppression is in a state of
uncertainty. Reviews of the existing results from 6 recent operational and ex-
perimental hail suppression projects are sufficiently suggestive of a hail sup-
pression capability in the range of 20 to 50 percent to suggest the need for an
extensive investigation by an august body of the hail suppression capability
exhibited in these and other programs.
One of the necessary steps in the wise experimentation and future use of hail
suppression in the United States is to cast the current status in a proper light.
This can only be accomplished by a vigorous in-depth study and evaluation of
the results of the recent projects.88
Conclusions from the TASH study
Sponsored by the Eesearch Applied to National Needs program of
the National Science Foundation, a major technology assessment of
hail suppression in the United States was conducted from 1975 through
1977, by an interdisciplinary research team.90 This Technology Assess-
ment of the Suppression of Hail (TASH) study was intended to bring
together all of the considerations involved in the application of hail
suppression, in the present and in the future, to ascertain the net value
of such technology to society. The goals of the study were :
To describe the current knowledge of hail suppression.
To identify long-range expectations for such a technology.
To estimate the societal impacts that might be generated by its wide use.
To examine public policy actions that would most equitably direct its beneficial
use.
From its interdisciplinary study of hail suppression and its impacts
the TASH team reached the following broad conclusions on the effects
of hail and on the potential technology for suppression of hail :
The United States experiences about $850 million in direct crop and property
hail losses each year, not including secondary losses from hail. The key character-
istic of hail is its enormous variability in size, time, and space.
Among the alternative ways of dealing with the hail problem, including crop
insurance, hail suppression, given a high level of development, appears to be the
most promising future approach in high hail loss areas. Economic benefits from
effective hail suppression vary by region of the country, with the most benefit to
66 National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council. Committee on Atmospheric
Sciences. "Weather and Climate Modification : Problems and Progress," Washington, D.C.,
1973. pp. 100-106.
87 Grant and Reid, "Workshop for an Assessment of the Present and Potential Role of
Weather Modification in Agriculture Production." 1975. pp. 33-45.
88 Changnon. "On the Status of Hail Suppression," 1977, p. 26.
68 Ibid., pp. 26-27.
90 Changnon. et al.. "Hail Suppression ; Impacts and Issues." Technology Assessment of
the Suppression of Hail (TASH) , 1977, 432 pp.
92
be derived in the Great Plains area. Any alterations in rainfall resulting from
hail suppression would importantly affect its economic consequences.
The effects of cloud seeding on rainfall are more significant than its effects on
hail from economic and societal standpoints.
At the present time there is no established hail suppression technology. It may
be possible to reduce damaging hail about 25 percent over the growing season in a
properly conducted project.
Reducing the scientific uncertainties about hail suppression will require a sub-
stantial commitment by the Federal Government for long-term funding of a sys-
tematic, well-designed program of research. For the next decade or so, monitoring
and evaluation of operational programs will be important.
Benefit-cost analysis revealed that investment in development of the high-level
technology would result in a ratio of 14 :1, with the present value of benefits esti-
mated to total $2.8 billion for 20 years. The low-level technology showed a nega-
tive benefit-cost ratio. Research and development to provide the high-level
technology is the best choice from an economic standpoint; a minimal level of
support would be nonbeneficial. In a word, if we are going to develop hail suppres-
sion technology, we would need to do it right.
Effective hail suppression will, because of the hail hazard, technological
approach, patterns of adoption, and institutional arrangements, lead to regionally
coherent programs that embrace groups of States, largely in the Great Plains.
Some would gain and others would lose from widespread application of an
effective hail suppression technology. Farmers within adopting regions would
receive immediate benefits from increased production. After several years this
economic advantage would be diminished somewhat, but increased stability of
income would remain. Farmers growing the same crops outside the adopting areas
would have no advantages and would be economically disadvantaged by commod-
ity prices lower than they would have been with no hail suppression. The price
depressing effects result from increased production in adopting areas. Consumers
would benefit from slightly decreased food prices. The impacts generated by a
highly effective technology include both positive and negative outcomes for vari-
ous other stake-holder groups in the Nation. For the Nation as a whole, the
impacts would be minor and beneficial. On balance, the positive impacts outweigh
the negative impacts if a high-level technology can be developed.
An adequate means of providing equitable compensation on an economically
sound basis for persons suffering from losses due to cloud seeding has not been
developed. Some better procedure for compensating losers will be necessary. In
addition, present decision mechanisms and institutional arrangements are inade-
quate to implement the technology in a socially acceptable manner. Some mecha-
nism for including potential opponents in the decisionmaking process will be
required.
It is unlikely that widespread operational hail suppression programs would
have serious adverse environmental impacts, although lack of sufficient knowledge
indicates that adverse impacts should not be ruled out. Long-term environmental
effects are not known at the present time.91
DISSIPATION OF FOG AND STRATUS CLOUDS
Fog poses a hazard to man's transportation activities, particularly
to aviation, where as a result of delays air carriers lose over $80 million
annually. Highway accidents attributed to fog are estimated to cost
over $300 million per year.92 Most often the impetus to develop effec-
tive fog and stratus cloud dispersal capabilities has come from the
needs of commercial and military aircraft operations.
There are two basic kinds of fog, and the suppression of each re-
quires a different approach. Supercooled fog and stratus clouds are
comprised of liquid water droplets whose temperature is below f reez-
81 Farhar. Barbara C, Stanley A. Changnon, Jr., Earl R. Swanson, Ray J. Davis, and
J Eugene Haas. "Hail Suppression and Societv. Summary of Technology Assessment of Hail
Suppression," Urbana. 111.. "Illinois State Water Survey, June 1977." pp. 21-22. (This
document is an executive summary of the technology assessment by Changnon, et al., "Hail
Suppression ; Impacts and Issues.")
92 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, "Summary Report : Weather Modi-
fication ; Fiscal Years 1969, 1970, 1971," Rockville, Md., May 1973, p. 72.
93
ing (i.e., 0° C or below). Supercooled fogs account for only about 5
percent of all fog occurrences in the United States, although they are
prevalent in certain parts of northeastern and northwestern North
America. The remainder of North American fogs are warm fogs (water
droplets warmer than 0° C).93 Although cold fog has been amenable
to modification, so that there essentially exists an operational tech-
nology for its dissipation, practical modification of warm fogs, on an
economical basis, has not yet been achieved.
Cold fog modification
Dispersal of cold fog by airborne or ground-based techniques has
been generally successful and has become an operational weather modi-
fication technology. In the United States cold fog dispersal operations
have been conducted, for example, by commercial airlines, usually with
dry ice as the seeding agent. The U.S. Air Force has also operated
ground-based liquid propane systems, at domestic and foreign bases,
which have been effective in dissipating cold fog over runways, thus
reducing flight delays and diversions.94 Conducted largely at airports,
cold fog suppression is usually accomplished using aircraft, which drop
various freezing agents, such as dry ice or silver iodide as they fly over
the fog-covered runways. The agents initiate ice crystal formation and
lead to precipitation of the growing crystals.95 Ground-based systems
for cold fog dispersal have also been used and have some advantages
over airborne systems. Such a system can operate continuously for ex-
tended time periods more economically and more reliably.
Warm fog modification
The remainder of North American fogs are "warm fogs" for which
a suitable dispersal capability remains to be developed. Crutchfield
summarizes the status of warm fog dispersal technology and its eco-
nomic potential :
The much more extensive warm fogs which cause delays, accidents, and costly
interruptions to every type of transportation have proved intractable to weather
modification thus far. Some success has been achieved on occasion by heavy
seeding with salt and other materials, but results have not been uniformly good,
and the materials used have presented environmental problems in the areas
treated. Heating airport runways has been of some benefit in dealing with warm
fog, but at present is not generally effective in cost-benefit terms and can inter-
rupt air traffic.
Nevertheless, the research and technology problems involved in the dispersal
of warm fog appear to be of manageable proportions, and the benefits from an
environmentally acceptable and predictable technique for dealing with warm
fog would be of very real interest in terms of economic gain.96
A number of field techniques have been attempted, with some meas-
ure of success, for artificial modification of warm fogs. Seeding is
one technique, where the seeding agents are usually hygroscopic parti-
cles, solution drops, or both. There are two possible desired effects of
seeding warm fogs, one being the evaporation of fog droplets, resulting
in visibility improvement. A second desired effect of seeding, results
from the "coalescence" process, in which the solution droplets, falling
93 Changnon, "Present and Future of Weather Modification," 1975, p. 165.
94 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration "Summary Report : Weather Modi-
fication ; Fiscal Year 1973." Rockville, Md., December 1974, pp. 39-40.
9a Changnon. "Present and Future of Weather Modification," 1975. p. 165.
98 Crutchfield, James A., "Weather Modification : The Economic Potential." Paper prepared
for U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board. University of
Washington, Seattle, May 1977, pp. 5-6.
34-857 O - 79 - 9
94
through the fog layer, collect the smaller fog droplets, increasing
visibility as the fog particles are removed in the fallout.97 There is a
wide diversity of hygroscopic particles which can and have been used
for warm fog dissipation. Sodium chloride and urea are the most
common, but others have included polyelectrolyte chemicals, an ex-
ceedingly hygroscopic solution of ammonium-nitrate urea, and some
biodegradable chemicals. Seeding particle size is critical to the effec-
tiveness of a warm fog dispersal attempt ; it has been found that poly-
dispersed particles (i.e., material with a distribution of particle sizes)
are more effective in inducing fog modification than are extra fine
particles of uniform size, which were only thought to be optimum in
earlier experiments. Other problems which are the subject of con-
tinuing study relate to the seeding procedures, including the number
of flights, number of aircraft to be used, and flight patterns in
accordance with the local terrain and wind conditions. One of the
most difficult operational problems in the seeding of warm fog is that
of targeting. One solution to this problem, suggested by the Air Force,
is the implementation of wide-area seeding instead of single-line
seeding, which is so easily influenced by turbulence and wind shear.98
Another technique for dissipation of warm fog makes use of heating.
The physical principle involved is the vaporization of the water drop-
lets through introduction of sufficient heat to vaporize the water and
also warm the air to such a temperature that it will hold the additional
moisture and prevent condensation. Knowing the amount of liquid
water in the atmosphere from physical measurements, the necessary
amount of heat energy to be injected can be determined.99 The fea-
sibility of this approach was first demonstrated in England during
World War II, when it was necessary to fly aircraft in all kinds of
weather in spite of frequent fogbound conditions in the British Isles.
The acronym FIDO, standing for Fog Investigations Dispersal Of,
was applied to a simple system whereby fuel oil in containers placed
along the runways was ignited at times when it was necessary to land
a plane in the fog. Although burning as much as 6,000 gallons of oil
for a single airplane landing was expensive and inefficient, it was
justified as a necessary weather modification technique during war-
time.99*
Initial and subsequent attempts to disperse fog by burning liquid
fuel were found to be hazardous, uneconomical, and sometimes in-
effective, and, as a result, not much was done with this heating tech-
nique until the French revised it, developing the Turboclair method
for dissipating fog by heating with underground jet blowers. After 10
years of development and engineering testing, the system was tested
successfully by the Paris Airport Authority at Orly Airport. This
program has given a new interest and stimulated further research and
development of this technique both in the United States and elsewhere.
In the United States, the Air Force conducted Project Warm Fog
to test the effectiveness of heating to remove warm fog. It is clear that
this method is promising; however, further studies are needed.1
97 Mosohnndreas. Demetrlos J., "Present Capabilities to Modify Warm Fog and Stratus,"
Geomet. Inc.. report No EF-300. Technical report for Office of Naval Research and Naval
Air Svstems Command, Rockvllle, Md., Jan, 18, 1974, p. 13.
88 Ibid., pp. 16-17.
" Ibid pp. 24. 30.
Halacy, Daniel S., Jr., "The Weather Changers," New York, Harper and Row. 1968,
pp. 105-107.
1 Moschandreas. "Present Capabilities to Modify Warm Fog and Stratus," 1974, pp.
95
Research and development on warm fog dispersal systems has con-
tinued under sponsorship of the U.S. Air Force, using both passive
heat systems, and thermokinetic systems which combine both heat and
mechanical thrust. A thermokinetic system, known as the Warm Fog
Dispersal System (WFDS), consists of three components: The com-
bustors, the controls, and the fuel storage and distribution hardware.
Testing of the WFDS by the Air Force is to be conducted during late
1978 and 1979 at Otis Air Force Base in Massachusetts, after which it
is to be installed and operational at an Air Force base by 1982.2 Dis-
cussion of the Air Force development program and of the concurrent
studies and interest on the Federal Aviation Administration in this
thermokinetic fog dispersal system is found in chapter 5 of this report.3
There have been attempts to evaporate warm fogs through mechani-
cal mixing of the fog layer with warmer, drier air from above. Such
attempts have been underway using the strong downwash from heli-
copters ; however, such a technique is very costly and would likely be
employed only at military installations where a number of helicopters
might be available.
The helicopters hover or move slowly in the dry air above the fog
layer. Clear dry air is moved downward into the fog by the circulation
of the helicopter rotors. The mixture of dry and cloudy air permits the
fog to evaporate, and in the fog layer there is created an opening whose
size and lifetime are determined by the meteorological conditions in
the area, by the flight pattern, and by the kind of helicopter.
Conclusions reached by scientists involved in a series of joint U.S.
Air Force- Army research projects using helicopters for fog dispersal
follow :
The downwash method by a single helicopter can clear zones
large enough for helicopter landing if the depth of the fog is less
than 300 feet (100 meters) .
Single or multiple helicopters with flight patterns properly
orchestrated can maintain continuous clearings appropriate for
aircraft takeoff and landing in fogs of less than 300 feet (100
meters) deep.4
In addition to the more commonly applied experimental techniques,
such as seeding, heating, and mechanical mixing, other attempts have
been made to disperse warm fogs. These have included the injection of
ions or charged drops into the fog and the use of a laser beam to clear
the fog. Further research is needed before definitive results can be
cited using these methods.5
Table 8 is a summary of research projects on warm fog dispersal
which had been conducted by various organizations in the United
States between 1967 and 1973. Note that, in addition to field experi-
ments, research included modeling, field measurements and observa-
tions of fog, chamber tests, statistical interpretation, model evaluation,
and operational assessment.
On the basis of his study of research projects through 1973 and
claims projected by the scientists involved in the various warm fog
8 Kunkel. Bruce A., "The Design of a Warm Fog Dispersal System." In preprints of the
Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification. Champaign, 111..
Oct 10-13. 1977. Boston, American Meteorological Society, 1977, pp. 174-176.
3 See pp. 305 and 308.
4 Moschandreas, "Present Capabilities To Modify Warm Fog and Stratus," 1974, p. 45.
6 Ibid., p. 14.
96
modification programs, Demetrios Moschandreas formulated the fol-
lowing conclusions on warm fog dispersal :
Seeding with hygroscopic particles has been successful; how-
ever, targeting problems would require the wide-area approach to
seeding. Urea has also been projected as the agent which is most
effective and least harmful to the environment.
The heating technique is very promising and very efficient;
studies for further verification of its capabilities are in order.
The helicopter technique by itself has not been as promising as
the combination of its use with hygroscopic seeding.
Studies on the other less often used techniques have not reached
the stage of wide field application.
Numerical modeling has provided guidelines to the field experi-
ments and insights to the theoretical studies of fog conditions.
The laboratory experiments have given the scientists the con-
trolled conditions necessary to validate a number of theories. The
unique contribution of chamber tests to a better understanding of
the dynamics of fog formation has been widely recognized.6
TABLE 8. — SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL RESEARCH RELATIVE TO WARM FOG DISPERSAL IN THE UNITED STATES,
THROUGH 1973 «
[From Moschandreas, 1974]
Area of effort
Year of publication
1967 2
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
Modeling and numerical ex-
NWRF
CAL
CAL
AFCRL
CAL
CAL
AFCRL
periments.
AFCRL
MRI
MRI
AFCRL
GEOMET
GEOMET
NWRF
GEOMET
GEOMET
NCAR
NWC
EPRF
Field measurements; fog ob-
CAL
CAL
AFCRL
CAL
servations.
MRI
MRI
CAL
AFCRL
EG&G
CAL
MRI
FAA
NWC
Chamber tests
CAL
CAL
USNPGS
CAL
CAL
Field experiments
CAL
CAL
AFCRL
MRI
AFCRL
CAL
FAA
EG&G
MRI
MRI
NWC
Statistical interpretation
AFCRL
Assessment of operational
NWRF
FAA
AFCRL
AFCRL
Use.
EG&G
i Research is listed by agency conducting the research, or sponsoring it, when reporting its contractor's efforts; or by
contractor's name when contractor's report is principal reference; individual researchers are not listed because these
change, even though the cont;mjity of effort is maintained.
s Work reported prior to 1967 is not included here.
Key: CAL— Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, Inc.; AFCRL— Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories; GEOMET—
GEOMET, Inc.; MRI— Meteorology Research, Inc.; NWRF— U.S. Navy Weather Research Facility; EPRF— U.S. Navy En-
vironmental Research Facility; EG&G— EG&G Environmental Services Ooeration; FAA— Federal Aviation Administra-
tion: NCAR— National Center for Atomospheric Research; NWC— Naval Weapons Center; USNPGS— U.S. Naval Postgrad-
uate School.
LIGHTNING SUPPRESSION
At any given time over the whole Earth there are about 2,000 thun-
derstorms in progress, and within these storms about 1,000 cloud-to-
ground discharges are produced each second.7 Lightning is essentially
a long electric spark, believed to be part of the process by which an
electric current is conducted from the Earth to the ipnosphere, though
- 1H1U., pp. W^— »0. I, XT
7 National Science Board. "Patterns and Perspectives In Environmental Science, Na-
tional Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.. 1972, p. 157.
97
the origin of the lightning discharge is still not fully understood. In
fair weather the atmosphere conducts a current from the positively
charged ionosphere to the ground, which has a negative charge.
The details of the charge-generating process within a thunderstorm
are not well understood, though theories have been proposed by cloud
physicists. Probably a number of mechanisms operate together to bring
about cloud electrification, though, essentially, the friction of the air
on the water droplets and ice crystals in the storm strips off electrons
which accumulate near the base of cumulonimbus clouds, while posi-
tive charge collects in the upper part. The negative charge near the
cloud base induces a local positive charge on the Earth's surface be-
neath, reversing the normal fair weather situation. When the electri-
cal potential between the cloud and ground becomes sufficiently large,
an electrical discharge occurs, in which electrons flow from the cloud
to the ground. In addition, there are discharges between clouds and
between oppositely charged portions of the same cloud.
In the rapid sequence of events which comprise a lightning stroke,
the initial, almost invisible, flow of electrons downward from cloud
to Earth, called the leader, is met by an upward-moving current of
positive charges, establishing a conducting path of charged particles.
A return stroke, much larger, then rushes from the ground to the
cloud. All of these events appear as a single flash since they occur in
about fifty microseconds; however, while most people perceive the
lightning stroke as travelling from cloud to ground, it is actually the
return stroke which provides the greatest flash.8
In the United States, lightning kills about 200 people annually, a
larger toll than that caused by hurricanes. Since 1940, about 7,000
Americans have lost their lives from lightning and related fires.9 These
casualties occur most often singly or occasionally two at a time, so that
they are not nearly so newsworthy as are the multiple deaths and
dramatic property damage associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, and
floods. On the other hand, a lightning problem affecting large areas
is the ignition of forest fires, some 10,000 of which are reported each
year in the United States, where the problem is most acute in the
Western States and Alaska.10 Such fires inflict damage on commercial
timber, watersheds, scenic beauty, and other resources, causing an
estimated annual damage cost of $100 million.11 Other examples in
which lightning can be especially dangerous and damaging include
discharges to aircraft and spacecraft and effects on such activities as
fuel transfer operations and the handling of explosives.
Because of the relative isolation of personal accidents due to light-
ning, the only feasible controls over loss of life are through implemen-
tation of safety measures which prevent exposure or by protection
of relatively small areas and structures with lightning arresters. For-
ested areas, however, require large area protection from lightning-
caused fires in order to promote sound forest management. It is hoped
8Anthes. Richard A., Hans A. Panofsky, John C. CaMr, and Albert Rango, "The AtmosT
phere," Columbus. Ohio. Charles E. Merrill. 1975, p. 174.
9 U.S. Department of Commerce, "Peak Period for Lierhtniner Nears ; NOAA Lists Safety
Rules." News Release NOAA 77-156. Washington. DC. June 19. 1977, p. 1.
10 Fuquay. Donald M., "Lightning Damage and Lightning Modification Caused by Cloud
Seeding." In Wilmot N. Hess (ed.), "Weather and Climate Modification," New York, John
Wiley & Sons, 1974, p. 605.
"Ibid., p. 604.
98
that the widespread damage to forest resources resulting from the
lightning-fire problem can be alleviated through use of weather modi-
fication techniques.
Lightning modification
General approaches to lightning suppression through weather mod-
ification, which have been contemplated or have been attempted, in-
clude :
Dissipation of the cloud system within which the thunderstorm
originates or reduction of the convection within the clouds so that
vigorous updrafts and downdrafts are suppressed.
Reduction of the number of cloud-to-ground discharges, es-
pecially during critical fire periods.
Alteration of the characteristics of discharges which favor
forest fuel ignition.
Use of other weather modification techniques to produce rains
to extinguish fires or to decrease the probability of ignition
through increase of ambient relative humidity and fuel moisture.
Lightning is associated with convective clouds; hence, the most
direct suppression method would involve elimination of the clouds
themselves or of the convection within them. Removal of the clouds
would require changes to gross properties such as temperature insta-
bility and moisture content of the air ; thus, such modification is not
technically, energetically, or economically feasible. However, it might
be possible to reduce somewhat the convection within the clouds.12
The formation of convective clouds depends on the upward motion
of moist air caused by thermal instability and the subsequent produc-
tion of water through cooling. This condensation releases more heat,
which, in turn, causes further buoyancy and rising of the cloud. At
these heights the temperature is low enough that the water can freeze,
releasing more latent heat and enabling the cloud particles to rise
even higher. As a result of the presence of nuclei which are naturally
present in the cloud, glaciation proceeds continuously. Through arti-
ficial nucleation, by seeding, natural glaciation may be reinforced and
development of the cloud assisted. Rapid, premature seeding, how-
ever, would still promote buoyancy but could also introduce so much
turbulence that the cloud is unable to develop, because colder air en-
tering the cloud by turbulent mixing would lower the changes of the
cloud reaching moderate altitudes. Since there is a high correlation
between cloud height, convective activity, and lightning, such early
nucleation of a cloud should reduce the likelihood of intense elec-
trical activity. Seeding would be accomplished by releasing silver
iodide into the cores of growing cumulus clouds ; it could be delivered
from ground dispensers or from aircraft into the updraft under the
cloud base. The amount of seeding material must be chosen carefully,
and, in order to increase the chances for cloud dissipation, overseed-
ing is probably most effective, though such overseeding will also tend
to reduce precipitation. On the other hand, rainfall may be advan-
tageous for other purposes, including its inhibiting lightning-caused
forest fires by providing moisture to the forest fuel. Consequently, the
advantages which might be achieved through reducing cloud con-
13 Stow, C. D.. "On the Prevention of Lightning," Bulletin of the American Meteorological
Society, vol. 50, No. 7, July 1969, p. 515.
99
vection and its attendant electrical activity must be weighed against
the possible advantages lost through reduced precipitation.13
A more efficient lightning-suppression approach might involve in-
terference with the processes which bring about charge separation in
the cloud. At least five different mechanisms by which cloud electrifica-
tion is established have been theorized, and possibly all or most of these
mechanisms are active in any given situation, although on different
occasions it is likely that some are more effective than others, depend-
ing on meteorological conditions and geographical locations.14 Data
are as yet insufficient for determining which mechanisms will predomi-
nate. It is not considered likely that a single treatment method would
suffice to suppress all lightning activity through prevention of charge
buildup, though it is conceivable that a given treatment may be capable
of suppressing more than one charge-generating process.15 In addition
to glaciation of the cloud by overseeding (described above in connec-
tion with convection reduction), accumulation of charge can be in-
hibited through seeding with various chemicals which affect the
freezing of water. Another technique uses seeding with a conducting
chaff (very fine metalized nylon fibers), which increases conductivity
between oppositely charged regions of the- storm and keeps the electric
field from building up to the lightning-discharge level. The chaff fibers
are of the type that have been used for radar "jamming," which can be
dispensed underneath a thunderstorm from an aircraft. Experiments
have shown this attempt at lightning suppression to have some
promise.16
Although reduction in the number of cloud-to-ground discharges
through cloud seeding would undoubtedly be instrumental in de-
creasing the total number of forest fires, ignition is also influenced by
such factors as the type of discharge, surface weather conditions, the
terrain-fuel complex, and the influence of preceding weather on fuel
moisture. The kind of discharge most frequently causing forest fires
has been observed and its characteristics have been measured. Observa-
tions indicate that ignition is most often caused by hybrid cloud-to-
ground discharges having long continuing current phases, whose
duration exceeds 40 milliseconds and that the probability of ignition is
proportional to the duration of the continuing current phase.17
Evaluation of lightning suppression technology
Seeding experiments to date have yielded results which suggest that
both the characteristics and the frequency of lightning discharges have
been modified. The physical processes by which lightning is modified
are not understood ; however, basic physical charging processes have
been altered through massive overseeding with silver iodide freezing
nuclei. Direct measurements of lightning electricity have also shown
that lightning strokes which contain a long continuing current are
probably responsible for most lightning-ignited forest fires. Keduction
of the duration of the long continuing current discharge through wea-
ther modification techniques may, therefore, be more significant in
13 Ibid.
" Ibid., pp. 516-519.
16 Ibid , p 519
" Kasemir. Heinz W.. "Lightning Suppression by Chaff Seeding and Triggered Light-
ning." In Wilmot N. Hess (editor), "Weather and Climate Modification," New York, Wiley.
1974, N pp. 612-622. n a . „ . B „
"Fuquav, "Lightning Damage and Lightning Modification Caused by Cloud Seeding,
1974, p. 606.
100
reducing forest fires than reduction of the total amount of lightning
produced by storms.
From experiments in lightning suppression carried out under Proj-
ect Skyfire by the U.S. Forest Service of the Department of Agricul-
ture between 1965-67. Fuquay summarizes the following specific re-
sults, based on a total of 26 individual storms (12 seeded and 14
unseeded) : 18
Sixty-six percent fewer cloud-to-ground discharges, 50 percent
fewer intracloud discharges, and 54 percent less total storm light-
ning occurred during seeded storms than during the not-seeded
storms.
The maximum cloud-to-ground flash rate was less for seeded
storms : over a 5-minute interval, the maximum rate averaged 8.8
for not-seeded storms and 5 for seeded storms; for 15-minute in-
tervals, the maximum rate for not-seeded storms averaged 17.7
and 9.1 for seeded storms.
The mean duration of lightning activity for the not-seeded and
seeded storms was 101 and 64 minutes, respectively. Lightning
duration of the not-seeded storms ranged from 10 to 217 minutes,
while that of seeded storms ranged from 21 to 99 minutes.
There was no difference in the average number of return strokes
per discrete discharge (4.1 not-seeded versus 4 seeded) ; however,
a significant difference was found for hybrid discharges (5.6 not-
seeded versus 3.8 seeded) .
The average duration of discrete discharges (period between
first and last return stroke) decreased from 235 milliseconds for
not seeded storms to 182 milliseconds for seeded storms.
The average duration of continuing current in hybrid dis-
charges decreased from 187 milliseconds for not-seeded storms to
115 milliseconds for seeded storms.
In a recent Federal appraisal of weather modification technology
it was concluded that results of field experiments to suppress light-
ning through silver iodide seeding have been ambiguous.19 Although
aim lysis of data previously obtained is continuing, the experimental
seeding program of the Forest Service has been terminated. In more
recent experiments, thunderstorms have been seeded from below
with chaff (very fine metalized nylon fibers). Based on an analysis of
10 chaff-seeded thunderstorms and 18 unseeded control storms, the
number of lightning occurrences during the seeded storms was about
25 percent of those observed in the control storms. This observed differ-
ence was statistically significant even though the experiments were
not strictly randomized.20
Experiments in lightning modification through cloud seeding have
given results showing that, in some cases, lightning can be modified
in a beneficial manner. From these results and the measured charac-
teristics of lightning strokes, a hypothesis of lightning modification is
being developed. There has been progress in identifying significant cor-
relations between occurrence of lightning and such variables as storm
u Fuquav. "Lightning Damage and Lightning Modification Caused by Cloud Seeding,"
1974, p. 6li.
19 U.S. Domestic Council, Environmental Resources Committee, Subcommittee on Climate
Change, "The Federal Role in Weather Modification." Washington, D.C., December 1975.
p. 10.
*>Ibid.
101
size, updraft characteristics, precipitation rates, and hail occurrence.
According to Fuquay, such early successes ought not obscure the mag-
nitude of the research yet required in order to identify and quantify
the degree and applicability of lightning modification to the lightning-
fire problem.21 He also warns that :
Until more is known about the adverse effects of seeding incipient thunder-
storms, unexpected and adverse effects must be considered, although improved
numerical models that accurately predict cloud development and the effects of
seeding should minimize the risk of unexpected events.22
MODIFICATION OF SEVERE STORMS
Severe storms have a greater immediate impact on human life and
property than most other weather phenomena. A major portion of
losses due to natural disasters results from two of the most destructive
kinds of severe storms — hurricanes and tornadoes. During an average
year the U.S. mainland is threatened by 8 tropical slorms and experi-
ences over 600 tornadoes.23 Among the results of the annual devastation
from these storms are the loss of hundreds of lives and the accumula-
tion of hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage.
Perhaps the most important problems to be attacked in weather
modification are associated with the abatement of severe storms. While
rainfall augmentation promises borderline economic value at best, al-
ternatives which can contribute more significantly to severe water
shortages may prove more suitable. On the other hand, the annual
threat of tolls in damages and fatalities from hurricanes and tornadoes
will persist year after year, and research directed toward modification
of these severe phenomena requires continued support. There have been
dramatic attempts, with some successes, in demonstrating the potential
reduction of the hazards of hurricanes ; however, almost no research
has been directed toward tornado suppression.
Hurricanes
A hurricane is an intense cyclone which forms over tropical seas,
smaller in size than middle-latitude cyclones, but much larger than a
tornado or a thunderstorm. With an average size of 500 miles (800
kilometers) in diameter, the hurricane consists of a doughnut-shaped
ring of strong winds in excess of 64 knots which surrounds an area of
extremely low pressure and calm at the storm's center, called the eye.2*
The generic name for all vortical circulations originating over tropi-
cal waters is "tropical cyclone." When fully developed with sufficiently
strong winds, such storms are called hurricanes in the Atlantic and the
eastern Pacific Oceans, typhoons in the northwest Pacific, baguios in
the Philippines, Bengal cyclones in the Indian Ocean, and willy-willies
near Australia. For a tropic cyclone whose winds are in the range of
33 to 64 knots, the official name' in the United States is a tropical storm.
The hurricane season is that portion of the year having a relatively
21 Fuquay, "Lightning Damage and Lightning Modification Caused by Cloud Seeding,"
1974. p. 612.
22 Ibid., p. 606.
23 Feieral Coordinator for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research. "Federal
Plan for Meteorological Services and Supporting Resenrch : Fiscal Year 1973." U.S. Depart-
ment of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, D.C.,
January 1972. p. 1.
24Anthes, Richard A.. Hans A. Panofskv. -Tohn J. Cahir. and Albert Rango. "The Atmos-
phere." Columbus, Ohio, Charles E. Merrill. 1975. p. 150.
102
high incidence of hurricanes and usually is regarded as the period
between June and November in the Northern Hemisphere.25
Owing to their duration, which exceeds that of earthquakes, and to
their violence, which approaches that of tornadoes, hurricanes are the
most destructive natural phenomena. Prior to Hurricane Agnes in
1972, whose total damage exceeded $3 billion, the annual hurricane
property losses in the United States amounted to about $450 million,
although two hurricanes in the 1960's, Betsy (1965) and Camille
(1969), each caused damage exceeding $1.4 billion.26 Improved tech-
niques in hurricane detection and warning have dramatically reduced
the number of deaths caused by hurricanes ; however, property losses
have continued to grow, as a result of increased population and activi-
ties in vulnerable coastal areas, with the attendant concentration of
new houses, buildings, and other facilities of higher replacement value.
Figure 8 shows the simultaneous increase in property losses and de-
crease in deaths due to hurricanes in the United States in the 20th
century through 1969.
Devastation and fatalities occur essentially from three phenomena
associated with hurricanes : the force of the winds in the storm itself,
the storm surge on coastal areas, and flooding which can result from
excessive and widespread rainfall as the storm moves inland. Since
wind force varies with the square of the wind speed, a 50-mile-per-hour
wind exerts four times as much force as a 25-mile-per-hour wind. Ac-
cordingly, a 10-percent reduction in maximum windspeed yields a de-
crease in wind force of about 20 percent.27 Attempts to modify hurri-
cane winds can thus be expected to reduce storm damage caused by
winds in approximate proportion to the corresponding reduction in
wind force.
25 Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research, U.S. Depart-
ment of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, "National Hurricane
Operations Plan," FCM 77- 2. Washington, D.C., May 1977, pp. 6-7.
20 Gentry, K. Cecil, "Hurricane Modification." In Wilmot N. Hess (ed.). "Weather and
Climate Modification," New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1974, p. 497.
27 Ibid., p. 498.
103
Figure 8. — Losses in the United States from hurricanes, 1915 through 1969, in
5-year periods (from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration).
_ As a hurricane moves across the coast from the sea. the strong winds
pile up water to extreme heights, causing storm surges. The resulting
onrushing water wreaks damage to shoreline and coastal structures.
The severity of the storm surge is increased by the hurricane-generated
wind waves which are superimposed on the surge. From Hurricane
Camille, the storm surge at Pass Christian, Miss., was 24.6 feet, higher
than any previous recorded tide. As a result, 135 people were killed,
63,000 families suffered personal losses, and Mississippi alone sustained
$1 billion in damage.28 The height of the storm surge depends both on
Anthes, Panofsky, Cahir, and Rango, "The Atmosphere," 1975, p. 159.
104
the windspeed and the shape and slope of the sea bottom offshore. If
there is a sharp dropoff in depth not far off the beach, the rise of the
sea level will be small, for example. Nearshore attempts to modify a
hurricane could lead to uncertain results, depending upon local condi-
tions. If the windspeed is reduced without moving the position of
maximum winds along the coast, the overall effect would likely be a
reduction in storm surge. However, should the modification activity
result in developing a new windspeed maximum at a different location,
the surge might increase or decrease, depending on bathymetry and
bottom topography.29 Solutions are not yet clear, and the storm surge
prediction problem is being studied intensely with the use of numerical
models.
Major hurricane damage can often be attributed to heavy rains and
the massive and sudden flooding which can result as the storm move's
inland. In mountainous regions especially, the floods from such rain-
fall can be devastating in losses to both life and property. Such flood-
ing was a major contributor to the 118 deaths and $3.5 billion in prop-
erty destruction 30 which resulted in June 1972 from Hurricane Agnes,
which set the record of achieving the greatest damage toll of all U.S.
hurricanes. Ironically, Agnes caused almost no major damage as it
went ashore. Hurricane modification activities which have been at-
tempted or are contemplated are unfortunately not designed to reduce
the rains significantly, but are intended rather to reduce the maxi-
mum winds.31
Generation and characteristics of hurricanes
A hurricane can be thought of as a simple heat engine driven by
temperature differences between the center of the storm and its mar-
gins. At each level the central column must be warmer than the
surrounding area to insure maintenance of the strong convection on
which the storm depends.32 While the energy which forms extratropical
cyclones is provided by temperature differences between different air
masses, the energy which generates and maintains hurricanes and
other tropical cyclones is derived from a single air mass through
condensation of water vapor, and there are seldom present any of
the frontal activities which are characteristic of storms originating
in temperate latitudes. The moisture-laden winds continuously supply
water vapor to the tropical storm, and the condensation of each gram
of the vapor releases about 580 calories of latent heat. Within this
thermally driven heat engine tremendous quantities of energy are
converted from heat to mechanical motion in a short time, a fact
readily apparent from the fury of the winds. The daily power of the
energy liberated within a hurricane has been estimated to be about
ten thousand times the daily power consumption in the United States.33
The importance of tin1 ocean in providing moisture to a hurricane
is seen in the weakening and dissipation of the storms after they have
crossed coastlines and travel over land.
20 Gentrv. "Hurricane Modification," 1974. p. 499.
30 National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere. "The Agnes Floods.: a Cost-
Audit of the Effectiveness of t^c Storm and Flood Warning System of the National Oceanic
and Atmosnheric Administration," a report for the Administrator of NOAA. Washington,
D.C., Nov. 22. 1972. p. 1.
:;1 Gentrv. "Hurricane-Modification." H>74. n. 490.
^Donn. William L. "Meteorology." 4th edition. New York. McGraw-Hill, 1975, p. 336.
"Ibid., p. 338.
105
Exactly how hurricanes form is not yet fully understood. They
are all generated in the doldrums (a region of equatorial calms),
though rarely if ever within latitudes closer than 5 degrees from the
Equator, over water whose temperature is at least 27° C. The relatively
high surface temperature is necessary for initiation of the convection.
Hurricanes are relatively rare features even of the tropics, and the
exact triggering mechanism is not yet known.34 Their origin is usually
traced to a low pressure disturbance which originates on the equatorial
side of the trough of an easterly wave.
Such a tropical disturbance moves slowly westward and slightly
poleward under the direction of the tropical east winds. If conditions
are right, this cluster of thunderstorms intensifies as it reaches the
region near the boundary between the tropical easterlies and the
middle-latitude westerlies, at about 25° latitude. It may then follow
a path which reverses toward the east as it leaves the tropics. The
tracks of 13 major hurricanes in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean are
shown in figure 9.
The development of the intense storm which might result from the
conditions noted above is described in the following way by Anthes
et al. :
The increased inflow toward the center of falling pressure produces increased
lifting of air, so that the thunderstorms become more numerous and intense. The
feedback cycle is now established. The inflowing air fuels more intense thunder-
storm convection, which gradually warms and moistens the environment. The
warmer air in the disturbance weighs less, and so the surface pressure continues
to fall. The farther the pressure falls, the greater the inflow and the stronger
the convection. The limit to this process would occur when the environment is
completely saturated by cumulonimbus clouds. Further condensation heating
would not result in additional warming, because the heat released would exactly
compensate for the cooling due to the upward expansion of the rising air.35
34 Ibid.
35 Anthes, Panofsky, Cahir, and Rango, "The Atmosphere," 1975, p. 154.
106
Figure 9. — Tracks of thirteen major hurricanes in the Xorth Atlantic from 1879
through 1955 (from U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office, Publication No. 21,
Sailing Directions for the West Indies, 1958).
As the storm forms, the winds begin to strengthen about the center,
increasing especially to the right of the direction in which the center
is moving, normally on the poleward side. The clouds organize them-
selves into a system and dense cirrus move forward in the direction
of the movement of the center. Suddenly, the pressure falls over a
small area and hurricane force winds form a tight band of 20 to 40
107
miles radius around the center. The well-organized clouds show a
spiraling structure, and the storm acquires an eye, a small nearly
circular area, coinciding with the region of lowest pressure. The winds
in the eye are light and variable and the clouds are scattered or
entirely absent.36 As the storm matures, the pressure ceases to fall
and the maximum winds do not increase further. Now the storm ex-
pands horizontally and large amounts of air are drawn in. As the
storm expands to a radius of about 200 miles or more it becomes less
symmetrical. Figure 10 is a vertical cross-section of the structure of
a typical mature hurricane, showing the direction of flow and cloud
distribution.37
In spite of the great damage and fatalities caused by hurricanes,
their effects are not completely destructive. In many areas of South-
east Asia and the west coast of Mexico, tropical storms are depended
upon for a large part of the water supply. Throughout the Southern
United States, hurricanes have also provided valuable drought relief.38
- Hurricane and other tropical cyclones are always characterized by
high wind velocities and by torrential rains. Wind velocities of 60 to
70 knots and more are normal for such storms. The air rotates rapidly,
moving spirally toward the center. Maximum gusts exceed 100 knots
and may reach 200 knots, although such high speeds are unrecorded
since instruments are blown away or made inoperable at these wind
speeds.39
Figure 10. — Vertical cross section through a hurricane, showing typical cloud
distribution and direction of flow, as functions of height and distance from
the eye. (From Anthes, Panofsky, Cahir, and Rango, 1975.)
Compared with extratropical storms, hurricanes are generally small,
circularly shaped zones of intense low pressure, with very steep pres-
sure gradients between the center and the periphery. The pressure
drop between the eye and the periphery is quite large, 20 to 70 milli-
bars being typical. The winds are in a constant circular cyclonic
motion (counterclockwise in the Northern Hemisphere and clockwise
in the Southern Hemisphere) ; however, the center of the storm is a
36 pPtterssen. Sverre. "Introduction to Meteorology," second edition, New York, McGraw-
Hill. 1958, pp. 242-243.
37 Anthes. Panofsky. Cahir. and Rango. "The Atmosphere," 1975. p. 157.
ssReihl, Herbert, "Introduction to the Atmosphere," New York, McGraw-Hill, 1965, pp.
178-179.
39 Gentilli. J.. "Tropical Cyclones." In Rhodes W. Fairbridge fed.). "The Encyclopedia
of Atmospheric Sciences and Astrogeology." Reinhold, New York, 1967, p. 1028.
* Widely scattered
_ — — shallow cumulus
1000
Distance from hurricane center (km)
108
calm region of low pressure, called the eye. which is about 10 miles
across on the average. The warm dry character of this region is due
to subsiding air, which is necessary for existence of the storm. Around
the eye is the wall, consisting of cumulonimbus clouds and the at-
tendant extreme instability and rising motion; in the wall area adja-
cent to the eye, heavy rains fall. Out from the central zone altostratus
and nimbostratus clouds mix to form a layer with a radius as great
as 200 miles. At higher altitudes and reaching to the outer regions
of the storm is a mixture of cirrus and cirrostratus clouds.40
In a mature hurricane a state of relative equilibrium is reached
eventually, with a particular distribution of wind, temperature, and
pressure. Such distributions for a typical hurricane are shown sche-
matically in figure 11. Note that the greatest pressure change and the
maximum windspeeds are in the region of the wall clouds, near the
center of the storm.41
Figtjbe 11.— Radial profiles of temperature, pressure, and windspeed for a mature
hurricane. The temperature profile applies to levels of 3 to 14 kilometers;
pressure and windspeed profiles apply to levels near the surface. (From
Gentry, 1974. )
Modification of hurricanes
Since the damage inflicted by hurricanes is primarily a result of the
high windspeeds, the principal goal of beneficial hurricane modifica-
40 Jerome Williams. John J. Hipsinson. and John D. Rohrhoujjh. "Sea and Air: The
Naval Environment," Annapolis. Md.. U.S. Naval Institute. 1968, pp. 262-263.
41 Gentry. "Hurricane Modification." 1974. pp. 502-503.
109
tion is the reduction of the severity of the storm's maximum winds.
The winds result from the pressure distribution, which, in turn, is
dependent on the temperature distribution. Thus, hurricane winds
might be reduced through reduction of temperature contrasts between
the core of the storm and the region outside.
Gentry notes that there are at least two important fundamentals of
hurricanes which have been established through recent studies, which
suggest possible approaches to modification of the severity of the
storms : 42
The transfer of sensible and latent heat from the sea surface to the
air inside the storm is necessary if the hurricane is to reach or retain
even moderate intensity.
The energy for the entire synoptic-scale hurricane is released by
moist convection in highly organized convective-scale circulations lo-
cated in and around the eye of the storm and in the major rain bands.
The first principle accounts for the fact that hurricanes form only
over warm tropical waters and begin to dissipate after moving over
land or cool water, since neither can provide sufficient energy flow to
the atmosphere to maintain the intensity of the storm. The second
principle explains why such a low percentage of tropical disturbances
grow to hurricane intensity. Possible field experiments for beneficial
modification of hurricanes follow from these principles. On the basis
of the first, techniques for inhibiting evaporation might be employed
to reduce energy flux from the sea surface to the atmosphere. Based
on the second principle, it might be possible to affect the rate of release
of latent heat in that small portion of the total storm which is occupied
by the active convective-scale motions in such a way that the storm is
weakened through redistribution of heating.43
Gentry discusses a number of possible mechanisms which have been
suggested for bringing about changes to the temperature field in a
hurricane.44 Since the warm core development is strongly influenced
by the quantity of latent heat available for release in air columns ris-
ing near the center of the storm, the temperature might be decreased
through reducing the water vapor in these columns, the water vapor
originating through evaporation from the sea surface inside the region
of high storm winds. It has been suggested that a film spread over the
ocean would thus reduce such evaporation. No such film is available,
however, which could serve this purpose and withstand rupturing and
disintegration by the winds and waves of the storm. Another sugges-
tion, tiiat the cooling of the sea surface might be achieved through
dropping cold material from ships or aircraft, is impractical, since
such great expenditure of energy is required. It has also been postu-
lated that the radiation mechanisms near the top of the hurricane might
be modified through distribution of materials of various radiation
properties at selected locations in the clouds, thus inducing changes to
the temperatures in the upper part of the storm. This latter suggestion
needs further evaluation both from the standpoint of its practicality
and from the effect such a change, if included, would theoretically have
on storm intensity.
The potential schemes for hurricane modification which seem to be
practical logistically and offer some hope for success involve attempts
42 Ibid., 1974. p. 503.
« Ibid., p. 504.
44 Ibid., p. 505.
34-857 O - 79 - 10
110
to modify the mechanism by which the convective processes in the eye-
wall and the rain bands distribute heat through the storm. Since water
vapor is condensed and latent heat released in the convective clouds, it
should be possible to influence the heat distribution in the storm
through changing the pattern of these clouds.45 Recent success in
modifying cumulus clouds promises some hope of success in hurricane
modification through cloud seeding. By modifying the clouds in a hur-
ricane, the storm itself may be modified, since the storm's intensity will
be affected through changing the interactions between the convective
(cloud) scale and the synoptic (hurricane) scales.46 Figure 12 shows
how the properties of a hurricane might be redistributed as a result
of changing the temperature structure through seeding the cumulus
cloud structure outside the wall. The solid curves in the figure repre-
sent distributions of temperature, pressure, and windspeed identical
with those shown in figure 11 without seeding; the dashed curves rep-
resent these properties as modified through seeding.47
The first attempt at hurricane modification was undertaken by sci-
entists of the General Electric Co., on a hurricane east of Jacksonville,
Fla., on October 13, 1947. Clouds outside of the wall were seeded with
dry ice in order to cause freezing of supercooled water, so that the ac-
companying release of latent heat might alter the storm in some man-
ner. Results of the experiment could not be evaluated, however, owing
to the lack of adequate measuring equipment for recording cloud char-
acteristics. Furthermore, the penetration of the wall clouds to the eye
or to the area of intense convection in the storm's rain bands was pre-
vented by failure of navigation aids. Based on information acquired
from more recent seeding experiments and increased understanding of
hurricanes, it seems doubtful that the 1947 seeding could have been
effective.48
« Ibid.
"Ibid., p. 504.
«Ibid., pp. 504-505.
48 Ibid., pp. 505-506.
Ill
Figure 12. — Radial profiles of temperature, pressure, and windspeed for a mature
hurricane before (solid curves) and possible changes after (dashed curves)
seeding. (The solid curves are the same as those in fig. 11.) (From Gentry,
1974.)
Hurricane seeding experiments were undertaken by the Department
of Commerce and other agencies of the Federal Government in 1961,
initiating what came to be called Project Stormfury. To date only four
hurricanes have' actually been seeded under this project — all of them
between 1961 and 1971 ; however, Stormfury has also included inves-
tigation of fundamental properties of hurricanes and their possible
modification through computer modeling studies, through careful
measurements of hurricane properties with research probes, and
through improvements in seeding capabilities.
The goal of hurricane seeding is the reduction of the maximum winds
through dispersing the energy normally concentrated in the relatively
small band around the center of the storm. The basic rationale for seed-
ing a hurricane with silver iodide is to release latent heat through
seeding the clouds in the eye wall, thus attempting to change the tem-
perature distribution and consequently weaken the sea level pressure
gradient. It is assumed that the weakened pressure gradient will allow
outward expansion, with the result that the belt of maximum winds
will migrate away from the center of the storm and will therefore
weaken. Actually, stimulation of condensation releases much more
latent heat than 'first hypothesized in 1961, and theoretical hurricane
models show that a new eve wall of greater diameter can be developed
by encouraging growth of cumulus clouds through dynamic seeding.49
» Ibid., pp. 510-511.
112
Following seeding of the four storms in Project Stormf ury, changes
were perceived, but all such changes fell within the range of natural
variability expected of hurricanes. In no case, however, did a seeded
storm appear to increase in strength. Hurricane Debbie, seeded first
on August 18, 1969, exhibited changes, however, which are rarely
observed in unseeded storms. Maximum winds decreased by about 30
percent, and radar showed that the eye wall had expanded to a larger
diameter shortly after seeding. After Debbie had regained her strength
on August 19, she was seeded again on August 20, following which
her maximum winds decreased by about 15 percent.50 Unfortunately,
data are not adequate to determine conclusively that changes induced
in Debbie resulted from seeding or from natural forces. Observations
from Hurricane Debbie are partially supported by results from simu-
lated experiments with a theoretical hurricane model ; however, simu-
lation of modification experiments with other theoretical models have
yielded contrary results.51
One of the problems in evaluating the results of hurricane modifi-
cation is related to the low frequency of occurrence of hurricanes
suitable for seeding experiments and the consequent small number of
such experiments upon which conclusions can be based. This fact re-
quires that hurricane seeding experiments must be even more carefully
planned, and monitoring measurements must be very comprehensive,
so that data acquired in the few relatively large and expensive experi-
ments can be put to maximum use. Meanwhile theoretical models must
be improved in order to show the sensitivity of hurricane characteris-
tics to changes which might be induced through seeding experiments.
Gentry has suggested that the following future activities should be
conducted under Stormf ury : 52
1. Increased efforts to improve theoretical models.
2. Collection of data to further identify natural variability in
hurricanes.
3. Expanded research — both theoretical and experimental — on
physics of hurricane clouds and interactions between the cloud
and hurricane scales of motion.
4. More field experiments on tropical cyclones at every oppor-
tunity.
5. Tests of other methods and material for seeding.
6. Further evaluation of other hypotheses for modifying
hurricanes.
7. Development of the best procedures to maximize results of
field experiments.
Tornadoes
The structure of tornadoes is similar to that of hurricanes, consist-
ing of strong cyclonic winds 53 blowing around a very low pressure
center. The size of a tornado, however, is much smaller than that of a
hurricane, and its wind force is often greater. The diameter of a tor-
so National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "Stormfury— 1977 to Seed One
Atlantic Hurricane U.S. Department of Commerce News, NOAA 77-248, Washington.
D.C., Sept. 20. 1977, p. 3.
51 Gentry, "Hurricane Modification," 1974. p. 517.
^ Cyclonic > winds blow counterclockwise around a low pressure center in the Northern
Hemisphere ; in the Southern Hemisphere they blow clockwise.
113
nado is about one- fourth of a kilometer, and its maximum winds can
exceed 250 knots in extreme cases.54 On a local scale, the tornado is the
most destructive of all atmospheric phenomena. They are extremely
variable, and their short lifetime and small size make them nearly
impossible to forecast with any precision.
Tornadoes occur in various parts of the world; however, in the
United States both the greatest number and the most severe tornadoes
are produced. In 1976. there were reported 832 tornadoes in this coun-
try,55 where their origin can be traced to severe thunderstorms, formed
when warm, moisture-laden air sweeping in from the Gulf of Mexico
or the eastern Pacific strikes cooler air fronts over the land. Some of
these thunderstorms are characterised by the Auolent updrafts and
strong tangential winds which spawn tornadoes, although the details
of tornado generation are still not fully understood. Tornadoes are
most prevalent in the spring and occur over much of the Eastern two-
thirds of the United States; the highest frequency and greatest devas-
tation are experienced in the States of the middle South and middle
West. Figure 13 shows the distribution of 71,206 tornadoes which
touched the ground in the contiguous United States over a 40-year
period.
Even in regions of the world favorable to severe thunderstorms, the
vast majority of such storms do not spawn tornadoes. Further-
more, relatively few tornadoes are actually responsible for deaths and
severe property damage. Between 1960 and 1970, 85 percent of tornado
fatalities were caused by only 1 to iy2 percent of reported tornadoes.56
Nevertheless, during the past 20 years an average of 113 persons have
been killed annually by tornadoes in the United States, and the annual
property damage from these storms has been about $75 million.57
Modification of tornadoes
Alleviation from the devastations caused by tornadoes through
weather modification techniques has been a matter of considerable
interest. As with hurricanes, any such modification must be through
some kind of triggering mechanism, since the amount of energy pres-
ent in the thunderstorms which generate tornadoes is quite large. The
rate of energy production in a severe thunderstorm is roughly equal to
the total power-generating capacity in the United States in 1970.58
The triggering mechanism must be directed at modifying the circula-
tion through injection of small quantities of energy.
^ Anthes, Panofsky, Cahir, and Rango, "The Atmosphere," pp. 150, 180.
50 NOAA news. "Skywarn 1977 — Defense Against Tornadoes," U.S. Department of Com-
merce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Rockville, Md., Feb. 18, 1977,
vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 4-5.
56 Davies-Jones, Robert and Edwin Kessler, "Tornadoes." In Wilmot N. Hess (ed.),
"Weather and Climate Modification," New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1974, p. 552.
» Ibid.
58 Anthes, Panofsky, Cahir, and Rango, "The Atmosphere," 1975, p. 185.
114
Figure 13. — Tornado distribution in the United States, where contours enclose
areas receiving equal numbers of tornadoes over a 40-year period. Frequencies
are based on number of 2-degree squares experiencing first point of contact
with the ground for 71,206 tornadoes. (From Wilkins, 1967, in Encyclopedia
of Atmospheric Sciences and Astrology, Reinhold.)
Tornado modification has not been attempted in view of the pres-
ent insufficient knowledge about their nature and the lack of adequate
data on associated windspeeds. There are potential possibilities, how-
ever, which can be considered for future research in tornado modifica-
tion. One proposal is to trigger competing meteorological events at
strategic locations in order to deprive a tornadic storm of needed in-
flow. This technique, suggested by the presence of cumulus clouds over
forest fires, volcanoes, and atomic bomb blasts could use arrays of
large jet engines or oil burning devices. Another approach for dis-
persal of convective clouds which give rise to thunderstorms might
involve the use of downrush created by flying jet aircraft through
the clouds. A further possibility would depend on changing the char-
acteristics of the Earth's surface such as the albedo or the availability
of water for evaporation.59
Tornadoes tend to weaken over rougher surfaces due to reduction
of net low-level inflow. Upon meeting a cliff, tornadoes and water-
spouts often retreat into the clouds, and buildings also tend to reduce
ground level damage. Thus, forests or artificial mounds or ridges
might offer some protection from tornadoes, although very severe
tornadoes have even left swaths of uprooted trees behind.60
Modification of tornadoes by cloud seeding would likely bo the cheap-
est and easiest method. Sodium iodide seeding could possibly shorten
the life of a tornado if the storm's cold air outflow became stronger and
overtook the vortex sooner, thus cutting off the inflow. Seeding a
neighboring cell upstream of the low-level inflow might also be bene -
09 Davies-Jones and Kessler, "Tornadoes," 1974, p. 590.
» Ibid.
115
ficial, if the rapidly developing seeded cloud, competing for warm,
moist air, reduces the inflow and weakens the rotating updraft. It is
also possible that seeding would increase low-level convergence, lead-
ing to intensification of a tornado.61
Davies- Jones and Kessler conclude that :
Any efforts to modify a severe storm with potential or actual tornadoes
obviously will have to be carried out with extreme caution * * *. Actual modifica-
tion attempts on menacing tornadoes are probably several years away. In the
meantime, we should seek improved building codes and construction practices
and continue research into the actual morphology of convective vortices.62
In spite of the speculations on how tornadoes might be modified, no
tests have yet been conducted. The small size and brief lifetime of tor-
nadoes make them difficult and expensive to investigate. However, in
view of their destructiveness, they must be given more attention by
meteorologists, who should seek ways to mitigate their effects. Only
further research into the character of tornadoes, followed by careful
investigation of means of suppressing them, can lead to this desired
reduction in the effects of tornadoes.
Technical Problem Areas in Planned Weather Modification
In this section a number of major problem areas associated with the
development of weather modification technology will be addressed.
These topics are not necessarily confined to the modification of any one
of the weather phenomena discussed in the previous section but apply
in general to a number of these categories of phenomena. Some of the
problem areas have implications which extend beyond the purely
technical aspects of planned weather modification, bearing also on
social, economic, and legal aspects as well. Included are discussions on
the problems of seeding technology, evaluation of results of weather
modification projects, extended area and extended time effects from
advertent weather modification, and potential approaches to weather
and climate modification which involve techniques other than seeding.
The problems of inadvertent weather modification and of potential
ecological effects from planned weather modification could also prop-
erly be included in this section ; however, these topics are addressed in
chapter 4 and 13, respectively, in view of their special significance.
seeding techonology
In recent years there has been progress in developing a variety of
ice-nucleating agents available for cloud seeding, although silver iodide
continues to be the principal material used. Other seeding agents which
have been studied include lead iodide, metaldehyde, urea, and copper
sulfide. Nucleants have been dispensed into the clouds from both
ground-based generators or from aircraft. In some foreign countries,
such as the Soviet. Union, rockets or artillery have been used to place
the seeding material into selected regions of the clouds; however, this
means of delivery does not seem to be acceptable in the United States.
There have been both difficulties and conflicting claims regarding the
targeting of seeding materials, particularly from groimd generators,
ever since the earliest days of cloud seeding. It is always hoped that
ft Ibid., pp. 590-591.
«a Ibid., p. 591.
116
the nucleant will be transported from the generator site by advection,
convection, and diffusion to parts of the clouds which have been iden-
tified for modification. Difficulties have been observed under unstable
conditions, where the plume of nucleants was disrupted and wide angle
turbulent diffusion was severe. Valley locations in mountainous areas
are often subjected also to inversions and to local channeling so that
trajectory determinations are extremely difficult. Even plumes of seed-
ing material from aircraft have shown an erratic pattern. The prob-
lems of irregular plume goemetry appear to increase as distortion
occurs near fronts in mountain terrain, that is, under just the circum-
stances where cloud seeding is often attempted.63
In view of the limited vertical transport of silver iodide observed
in some studies (that is, up to 450 meters above the terrain at distances
of several kilometers from the generators), some have concluded
that, under conditions of the tests, ground-based generators are
probably not effective. However, other studies have shown that one
cannot generalize that ground generators are not always effective.
Thus, more desirable effects can be achieved with generators at high
altitudes where there is little chance of inversion trapping of the
silver iodide as in other tests.64
Much of the ambiguity associated with ground-based generators is
reduced when the nucleant material is placed into the cloud directly
by an aircraft using flares or rockets. However, airborne seeding also
presents important targeting problems. Of course, targeting difficul-
ties are reduced in the case of single cloud seeding, where the aircraft
is flying directly beneath the cloud in the active updraft area. How-
ever, questions of proper vortical ascent persist when the objective is
to lay down from the aircraft an elevated layer of nucleant-rich air
that is intended to drift over the target area.65
In conclusion, the 1973 National Academy of Sciences study says :
To summarize the results of the past few years' work on targeting, it can he said
that earlier dobuts about the inevitability of nuclei reaching effective altitudes
from ground generators tend to be supported by a number of recent observational
studies. Some of these merely confirm the rather obvious prediction that stable
lapse rates will be unfavorable to the efficacy of ground generators ; others indi-
cate surprising lack of vertical ascent under conditions that one might have
expected to favor substantial vertical transport. The recent work also tends to
support the view that plumes from ground generators in mountainous terrain
must be expected to exhibit exceedingly complex behavior ; and each site must
be expected to have its own peculiarities with respect to plume transport. Tracking
experiments become an almost indispensable feature of seeding trials or operations
in such cases.66
There are three types of airborne seeding agent delivery systems in
common use — burners, flares, and hoppers. Burners are used mainly
for horizontal seeding, often at the cloud base as discussed above. Poly-
technic flares are of two types — those used in vertical drops, similar to
a shotgun shell or flare-pistol cartridge, and the end-burning type,
similar to warning flares. The flares contain silver iodide with or with-
out an auxiliary oxydizer, such as potassium nitrate, together with
aluminum, magnesium, and synthetic resin binder. Dropping flares are
68 National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Committee on Atmospheric
Sciences, "Weather and Climate Modification : Problems and Progress," Washington, D.C..
1973. pp. 115-16.
61 Ibid., p. 117.
85 Ibid., pp. 118, 120.
M Ibid., pp. 119-120.
117
intended to be dropped into updrafts and to seed the cloud over a verti-
cal depth as great as a kilometer, while burner seeding is intended to be
more controlled and gradual. Hoppers dispense materials in solid form,
such as the particles of dry ice crushed and dropped into clouds and
cold fogs. For warm fog and cloud modification hoppers are used to
dispense dry salt or urea. Sometimes these materials are pumped in a
solution to nozzles in the wings, where the wingtip vortices help mix
the agent into the air.67
On the ground there are a number of seeding modes which are fre-
quently used, and types of nucleants used with ground-based genera-
tors are commonly of two types — a complex of silver iodide and sodium
iodide or of silver iodide and ammonium iodide. Outputs from the gen-
erator are usually from 6 to 20 grams per hour, although generators
with much greater outputs are used sometimes. One seeding mode in-
volves dispensing continuously into the airstream from a ground gen-
erator at a fixed point, the approach used most commonly in mountain-
ous terrain. If the generator is located in flat country at temperatures
above freezing, the nucleation level is reached through entrainment of
the material into the convection.68
The nucleating effectiveness of silver iodide smoke is dependent upon
the cloud temperature, where the colder the temperature the greater is
the number of ice crystals formed per gram of silver iodide. Tests of
nucleating effectiveness are made in the Colorado State University
cloud simulation facility, where the nucleant is burned in a vertical
wind tunnel and a sample of the aerosol is collected in a syringe and
nucleant density calculated from the pyrotechnic burn rate and the
tunnel flow rate. The syringe sample is diluted with clean, dry air and
injected into a precooled isothermal cold chamber containing cloud
droplets atomized from distilled water. Ice crystals which grow and
settle out are collected on microscopic slides, so that nucleating effec-
tiveness can be calculated as the ratio of concentrated crystals detected
to the mass of nucleating material in the air sample.69
As part of the preparations for the 1976 seeding operations in the
Florida area cumulus experiment (FACE) of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Sax et al., carefully
evaluated the silver iodide effectiveness of different flares used in
FACE. The results of these effectiveness studies, conducted with the
Colorado State University facility, are shown in figure 14. It was dis-
covered that a newly acquired airborne flare, denoted as NEI TB-1
in the figure, was considerably more effective than both the Navy
flares used earlier and another commercially available flare (Olin
WM-105). The superiority of the NEI TB-1 material at warmer
temperatures is particularly noteworthy.70 In another paper, Sax,
Thomas, and Bonebrake observe that crystalline ice concentrations in
clouds seeded in FACE during 1976 with the NEI flares greatly
exceeded those found in clouds seeded during 1975 with Navy flares.
67 Ruskin, R. E. and W. D. Scott, "Weather Modification Instruments and Their Use."
In Wilmot N. Hess (ed.), "Weather and Climate Modification," New York, Wiley, 1974, pp.
193-194.
68 Elliott, Robert D., "Experience of the Private Sector." In Wilmot N. Hess (ed.),
"Weather and Climate Modification," New York, Wilev, 1974, p. 57.
09 Sax, Robert I.. Dennis M. Garvey, Farn P. Parungo, and Tom W. Slusher, "Characteris-
tics of the Agl Nucleant Used in NOAA's Florida Area Cumulus Experiment." In preprints
of the "Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification," Champaign,
111., Oct. 10-13. 1977. American Meteorological Society, Boston, 1977, p. 198.
70 Ibid., pp. 198-201.
118
They conclude that, if differences in sampling time intervals and effects
of instrumentation housing can be ignored, there is indicated a much
greater nucleation effectiveness for the XEI flares which were used
predominantly after July 1975.71 The implications of this result are
very far reaching, since the borderline and/or slightly negative results
of many previous experiments and operational projects1 can possibly
be laid to the ineffectiveness of the silver iodide flares previously
used.
0 -5 -10 -15 -20
CLOUD TEMPERATURECC.)
Figure 14. — Effectiveness of various silver iodide flares in providing artificial
nuclei as a function of cloud temperature. The principal comparison is between
the XEI TB-1 and the Navy TB-1 flares (see text) ; the curve of mean data for
the Olin WM-105 flares is included for comparison. The curves show that the
XEI flares, used In FACE in late 1975 and 1976 were significantly more effec-
tive in producing nuclei at warmer temperatures just below freezing. ( From
Sax, Garvey, Parungo, and Slusher, 1977.)
EVALUATION OF WEATHER MODIFICATION PROJECTS
There has been much emphasis on evaluation methodology on the
part of weather modification meteorologists and statisticians, partic-
ularly with regard to precipitation modification. Progress in this
71 Sax. Robert I.. Jack Thomas. Marilyn Bonebrake. "Differences in Evolution of Ice
Within Seeded and Nonseeded Florida Cumuli as a Function of Nucleating Agent." In pre-
prints of the "Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification. " Cham-
paign, 111., Oct. 10-13, 1977. Boston, American Meteorological Society, 1977," pp. 203-205.
119
area has been slow, owing to the complexity of verification problems
and to inadequate understanding of cloud physics and dynamics.
Having reviewed previous considerations of evaluation attempts,
Changnon discovered a wide variety of results and interpretations,
noting that "a certain degree of this confusion has occurred because
the methods being used were addressed to different purposes and
audiences, and because there has been no widely accepted method of
verification among investigators." 72 He continues :
For instance, if one considers identification of changes in the precipitation
processes most important to verification of modification efforts, then he will
often undertake evaluation using a physical-dynamic meteorological approach.
If he considers statistical proof of surface precipitation changes the best method,
he may concentrate verification solely on a statistical approach or make in-
adequate use of the physical modeling concepts. On the other hand, if the evalua-
tion is to satisfy the public, the consumer, or the governmental decision-maker,
it must be economic-oriented also. Hence, a review of the subject of previous
evaluation methodology must be constantly viewed with these different goals
and concepts in mind.73
Evaluation methodology for weather modification must deal with
three fundamental problems which Changnon has identified : 74
1. There are many degrees of interaction among atmospheric forces
that result in enormous variability in natural precipitation, greatly
restricting attempts for controlled experiments that are attainable
in other physical and engineering sciences.
2. There is an absolute need to evaluate weather modification with
statistical procedures; this requirement- will exist until all underlying
physical principles of weather modification can be explained.
3. The data used in the evaluation must be sufficiently adequate in
space and time over an experimental region to overcome and describe
the natural variability factors, so that a significant statistical signal
may be obtained within the noise of the variability.
It is further recognized that analysis of weather modification ex-
periments is closely akin to the weather prediction problem, since
evaluation of weather modification efforts is dependent on a com-
parison of a given weather parameter with an estimate of what would
have happened to the parameter naturally. Thus, the better the pre-
diction of natural events, the better can a weather modification proj-
ect be designed and evaluated, at the same time reducing the verifica-
tion time required by a purely statistical approach.75
Initially, weather modification evaluation techniques used only the
observational or "look and see" approach, improved upon subsequently
by the "percent of normal" approach, in which precipitation during
seeding was compared with normals of the pre-experimental period.
Later, using fixed target and control area data comparisons, regres-
sion techniques were attempted, but the high variability of precipita-
tion in time and space made such approaches inapplicable. In the
mid-1960's there was a shift in sophisticated experiments toward
use of randomization. In a randomized experiment, seeding events
are selected according to some objective criteria, and the seeding
agent is applied or withheld in sequential events or adjacent areas
72 Changnon. Stanley A.. Jr.. "A Review of Methods to Evaluate Precipitation Modifica-
tion in North America." Proceedings of the WMO/IAMAP Scientific Conference on Weather
Modification. Tashkent. U.S.S.R.. Oct. 1-7, 1973, World Meteorological Organization.
WMO— No. 399. Geneva, 1974, p. 397.
73 Ibid., p. 398.
74 Ibid.
75 Ibid.
120
in accordance with a random selection scheme. An inherent problem
with randomization is the length of experimental time required;
consequently, the approach is not often satisfying to those who wish
to obtain maximum precipitation from all possible rain events or
those who want to achieve results in what appears to be the most
economical manner. As a result, commercial projects seldom make
use of randomization for evaluation, and such techniques are gen-
erally reserved for research experiments.76
In very recent years the randomization approach, which to many
appeared to be too "statistical" and not sufficiently meteorological
in character, has been improved on through a better understanding
of atmospheric processes, so that a physical-statistical approach has
been adopted.77
Changnon reviewed approximately 100 precipitation modification
projects in North America and found essentiallv 6 basic methods
that have been employed in project evaluations. He identified these
as (1) direct observation (usually for single element seeding trials),
(2) one-area continuous with no randomization (involving historical
and/or spatial evaluation), (3) one-area randomization, (4) target-
control area comparisons, (5) cross-over with randomization, and
(6) miscellaneous.78 These methods, along with the kinds of data
which have been used with each, are listed in table 9.
TABLE 9.— REVIEW OF EVALUATION METHODS FOR PRECIPITATION MODIFICATION AND TYPES OF DATA
EMPLOYED
(From Changnon, "A Review of Methods to Evaluate Precipitation Modification in North America," 1974]
Methods
Surface
precipitation data
Meteorological
elements data
Geophysical-
economic data
Direct observation Change in type; duration
of precioitation; areal
distribution (vs. model)
One-area continu- Historical Area-rain regressions;
ous (nonrandom). weekend-weekday
rainfall differences;
frequency of rain
days.
Spatial Area-rain regressions;
pattern recognition;
trend surfaces; rain
rates; raindrop sizes;
frequency of rain
days; rain cell differ-
ences; precipitation
type change; areal
extent of rain.
Target control Area rainfall (day,
month, season) repres-
sions; area snowfall
(day, month, season).
One-area ran- Basically Area precipitation;
domized (hours statistical. plume area precipi-
pulsed). tation: change in pre-
cipitation type. Period
Physical plus precipitation; echo
statistical. area; rain rates; echo
reflectivity; rain
initiation.
Crossover ran- Area rainfall; zonal
dnmized. rainfall.
Miscellaneous (post
hoc stratifica-
tions).
Cloud parameters; echo
parameters; seed and
plume.
Frequency of severe Added runoff; crop
weather; frequency yields; ecological,
of smoke days.
Synoptic weather con- Runoff increases; crop
ditions; cloud parame- yields; ecological,
ters; echo parameters;
Agl plums; nuclei
sources; airflow-
plume behaviors;
tracers in rain; atmos-
pheric electrical
properties.
Echo parameters Runoff regressions.
Synoptic weather con-
ditions; cloud parame-
ters; seed material in
plumes. Fcho parame-
ters; Agl in rain; cloud
numerical models;
storm behavior;
cloud base rain rate.
Synoptic types and
upper air conditions.
Upper air:
1. Temperature.
2. Winds.
3. Moisture stability
indices.
Synoptic weather types.
Water yield; runoff;
ecosystem (plant and
animals) and erosion;
avalanche— disbene-
fits.
76 Ibid., p. 399.
77 Ibid., p. 400.
78 Ibid., p. 407.
121
The direct observation technique was the first major approach to
evaluation and is still used occasionally. In addition to direct observa-
tion of the change and type of precipitation at the surface, the time of
precipitation initiation, and areal distribution following treatment of
a cloud or cloud group, other meteorological elements have been ob-
served ; these include radar echo characteristics, plume of the seeding
material, and cloud parameters (microphysical properties and dynam-
ical and dimensional properties such as updrafts, cloud size, and rate
of growth.).79
The one-area continuous (nonrandomized) techniques have been
employed to evaluate many of the commercially funded projects in
North America, recent efforts to investigate inadvertent precipitation
modification by large urban-industrial areas, and the statewide South
Dakota seeding program. This category includes the largest number
of projects, and control data for these nonrandomized projects have
included both historical data and data from surrounding areas. The
uncertainty of the control data as a predictor of target data is the basic
problem in using this approach.80
* Most federally sponsored weather modification projects have used
the one-area randomization method, which involves the use of a variety
of precipitation elements, including duration, number of storms, and
storm days and months. Projects evaluated with this method fall into
two categories, including, as shown in table 9, those using the basic
statistical approach and the more recent physical plus statistical tech-
niques. The latter group of projects have been based on a greater
knowledge of cloud and storm elements, using this information in
defining seedable events and combining it with statistical tests to detect
effects. Surface data, including rainfall rates and area mean rainfall
differences, are used to evaluate such one-area randomized projects.81
The target-control method involves a single area that is seeded on
a randomized basis and one or more nearby control areas that are never
seeded and, presumably, are not affected by the seeding.82 The method
had been used in about 10 North American projects through 1974.
Evaluation data have been mostly area rainfall or snowfall regres-
sions, runoff differences, and radar echo parameter changes.83
The crossover (with randomization) method has been considered
by many to be the most sophisticated of the statistical evaluation
methods. The crossover design includes two areas, only one of which
is seeded at a time, with the area for seeding selected randomly for
each time period. As with the target-control method, a problem arises
in this method in that there is the possibility of contamination of the
control areas from the seeded area.84 In the single project to which the
method had been applied up to 1974, the evaluation procedure involved
classification of potential treatment events according to meteorological
conditions, followed by area and subarea rainfall comparisons.85 The
so Ibid., pp. 408-409.
81 Ibid., p. 409. „ . „ T
82 Brier. Glenn W. "Design and Evaluation of Weather Modification Experiments. In
Wilroot N. Hess (editor), "Weather and Climate Modification," New York. Wiley, iy74.
P' safhangnon. "A Review of Methods To Evaluate Precipitaiton Modification in North
America." 1974. p. 409. , . „' Wil 01A
84 Brier. "Desiern and Evaluation of Weather Modification Experiments. 1974. p. 210.
ssChangnon. "A Review of Methods To Evaluate Precipitation Modification in Nortn
America," 1974, p. 409.
122
miscellaneous methods in table 9 refer basically to evaluation efforts
that have occurred after but generally within the context of the five
methods mentioned above, and have been largely post-hoc stratifica-
tions of results classified according to various meteorological subdivi-
sions, followed by re-analysis of the surface rainfall data based on
these stratifications.86
TABLE 10.-REVIEW OF EVALUATION METHODS FOR HAIL MODIFICATION AND TYPES OF DATA EMPLOYED
IFrom Changnon "A Review of Methods to Evaluate Precipitation Modification in North America," 1974]
Methods
Surface hail data
Meteorological elements Geophysical-economic
Direct observation Cessation of hail; hail Echo parameters; cloud
pattern; hail sizes parameters; Agl in hail.
change; hailstone
character.
One-area continuous Historical Number of hail days
(non-random).
Spatial Number of hail-produc- Radar echo character-
ing clouds/unit time; istics.
hailstreak frequencies;
number of hail days;
rainfall characteristics;
impact energy; loca-
tion of hail vs. total
precipitation area.
Target-control Energy; hail day frequen- Radar echo characteris-
cy. tics.
One-area random- Impact energy; hail day Radar echo characteris-
ization. frequency; hailf all tics; Agl in hail-rain,
characteristics.
Cross-over random- Energy; area of hail; vol- Agl in hail,
ized. ume of hail.
Crop-hail loss (insurance);
insurance ratej.
Crop-hail loss (insurance)
Hail loss (insurance).
Ecosystem (Agl); crop-
loss data.
About 20 projects concerned with hail modification were also ana-
lyzed by Changnon with regard to the' evaluation techniques used. The
five methods used, shown in table 10, include the first five methods
listed in table 9 and discussed above for precipitation modification
evaluation. A comparison of tables 9 and 10 reveals that the evaluation
of rain and snow modification projects uses much less variety of kinds
of data, especially the meteorological elements. The evaluation of hail
projects is largely statistical, owing to the lack of sophistication in the
physical modelling of hailstorms. There has been greater use of eco-
nomic data in hail evaluation, however, than in evaluation of rainfall
projects, due to some extent to the lack of surface hail data in weather
records and the consequent need to make use of crop insurance data.87
In hail evaluation, the direct observation method has been used to
look at physical effects from seeding individual storms and storm
systems, involving analysis of time changes in surface hail parameters,
radar echo characteristics, and cloud properties. The one-area contin-
uous (non-random) method has been the principal one used in com-
mercial hail projects and in studies of inadvertent urban-industrial
effects on hail, using historical and/or spatial data in the evaluation.
One major data form in these evaluations is the crop-hail loss from
insurance data. The target-control method has made use of hail fall
enerjry, hail-day frequencies, and crop-hail loss as evaluation data.88
» Ibid.
87 IMd., pp. 412-413.
88 Ibid., p. 413.
123
The one-area randomization method is the method used in the Na-
tional Hail Research Experiment.89 Various degrees of randomization
have been used, ranging from 50-50 to 80-20 ; however, the evaluation
data have been similar to those used in other methods. Silver concen-
trations in samples of rain and hail and elsewhere in the ecosystem
have been used as evaluation criteria. The crossover randomized
method of evaluation has also been applied to hail projects, using such
data as areal comparisons of impact energy, area extent of hail, and
total hail volume, noting also the concentrations of seeding material
in the hailstones.90
A necessary part of any evaluation scheme involves the measurement
or estimation of the amounts of precipitation fallen over a given area
following seeded or control storm events. Such measurement is part of
a more general requirement as well in collecting data for validation
of weather predictions, development of prediction models, compilation
of climatic records, and forecasting of streamrlowT and water resources.
Although the customary approach to precipitation measurement has
been to use an array of rain gages, weather radars have proven to be
useful tools for studying generally the spatial structure of precipita-
tion. Depending on the quality of the onsite radar system calibration,
there have been varying degrees of success, however, in use of this
tool. Often radar and rain gage data are combined in order to obtain
the best estimate of precipitation over a given area. In this arrange-
ment, the radar is used to specify the spatial distribution and the
gauges are used to determine the magnitude of the precipitation.91
. Exclusive use of rain gauges in a target area in evaluation of con-
nective precipitation modification projects requires a high gauge den-
sity to insure adequate spatial resolution. For a large target area, such
an array would be prohibitively expensive, however, so that weather
radars are often used in such experiments. The radar echos, which
provide estimates of precipitation, are calibrated against a relatively
smaller number of rain gages, located judiciously in the target area
to permit this calibration.
It has been shown that adjusted radar estimates are sometimes
superior to either the radar or the gages alone. Furthermore, the best
areal estimates are obtained using a calibration factor which varies
spatially over the precipitation field rather than a single average
adjustment. Erroneous adjustment factors may be obtained, however,
if precipitation in the vicinity of the calibration gage is so highly
variable that the gage value does not represent the' precipitation
being sampled by the radar. The technique for calculating the adjust-
ment factor typically involves dividing the gage measurement by the
summed rainfall estimates inferred from the radar, to obtain the
ratio, G/E, used subsequently to adjust radar estimates over a greater
area.92
89 The National Hail Research Experiment is discussed as part of the weather modifica-
tion program of the Natonal Science Foundation, ch. 5, p. 274ff.
90 Changnon, "A Review of Methods To Evaluate Precipitation Modification in North
America," 1974, p. 413.
91 Crane, Robert K., "Radar Calibration and Radar-rain Gauge Comparisons." In pre-
prints of the "Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification," Cham-
paign, 111., Oct. 10-13, 1977. Boston, American Meteorological Society, 1977, p. 369.
92 Klazura, Gerald E., "Changes in Gage/radar Ratios in High Rain Gradients by Varying
the Location and Size of Radar Comparison Area." In preprints of the "Sixth Conference
on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification," Champaign, 111., Oct. 10-13, 1977.
Boston, American Meterological Society, 1977, p. 376.
124
In the evaluation of hail suppression experiments, or measurements
of hailfall in general, there must be some means of determining the
extent and the magnitude of the hail. One technique is to use a net-
work of surface instruments called hailpads. Since single storms can
lay down hail swaths up to 100 kilometers long and tens of kilometers
wide, made up of smaller patches called "hailstreaks," the spacings of
hailpads must be reduced to a few hundred meters to collect quantita-
tive data over small areas. Even over small distances of the order of
1 kilometer, it has been discovered that total numbers of hailstones,
hail mass, and hail kinetic energy can vary by over a factor of 10.93
Another means of estimating hailfall is through use of crop- damage
studies. Such results are obtained through crop-loss insurance data,
aerial photography of damaged fields, and combinations of these data
with hailpad measurements.94
EXTENDED AREA EFFECTS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION
The term "extended area effects" refers to those unplanned changes
to weather phenomena which occur outside a target area as a result of
activities intended to modify the weather within the specified target
area. Such effects have also been called by a variety of other names
such as "downwind effects," "large-scale effects," "extra-area effects,"
"off-target effects," and "total-area effects." When the time dimen-
sion is considered, those changes which occur, or are thought to have
occurred, either within the spatial bounds of the target area or in
the extended area after the intended effects of the seeding should
have taken place are referred to as "extended time effects." These
inadvertent consequences are usually attributed either to the transport
of seeding material beyond the area intended to be seeded or the
lingering of such material beyond the time during which it was to be
effective.
In a number of experiments there have been indications that an
extended area effect occurred. The present state of understanding does
not permit an explanation of the nature of these effects nor have the
experimental designs provided sufficient information to describe their
extent adequately. The subject is in need of additional study, with
experiments designed to provide more specific data over pertinent
areal and time scales. In recent years two conferences on extended
area effects of cloud seeding have been convened. The first conference,
attended by 18 atmospheric scientists, was held in Santa Barbara,
Calif., in 1971 and was organized by Prof. L. O. Grant of Colorado
State University and by Kobert D. Elliott and Keith J. Brown of
North American Weather Consultants. Attendees at the 1971 seminar
discussed existing evidence of extended area effects, considered the
possible means of examining detailed mechanisms responsible for
the effects, and debated the implications for atmospheric water re-
sources management.
A second workshop was held, under the sponsorship of the National
63 Morgan, Griffith M. and Nell G. Towery. "Surface Hall Studies for Weather Modifica-
tion." In preprints of the "Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modi-
fication," Champaign, 111., Oct. 10-13, 1977, p. 384.
»* Ibid.
125
Science Foundation, at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo.,
Aug. 8-12, 1977.95 The Fort Collins meeting was attended by 44 partici-
pants, composed of social scientists, observationists, physical scientists,
modellers, statisticians, and evaluators. The group was exposed to a
mass of data from various weather modification projects from all over
the world and proposed to accomplish the following objectives through
presentations, workshop sessions, and general discussions :
Renew the deliberations of the Santa Barbara seminar.
Expand the scope of participation so as to integrate and inter-
pret subsequent research.
Better define the importance of extended spatial, temporal, and
societal effects of weather modification.
Prepare guidelines and priorities for future research direction.96
Extended area effects have special importance to the nontechnical
aspects of weather modification. From deliberations at the 1977
extended area effects workshop it was concluded that :
The total-area of effect concept adds a new dimension to an already complex
analysis of the potential benefits and disbenefits of weather modification. A speci-
fied target area may have a commonality of interests such as a homogeneous crop
in a farm area or a mountain watershed largely controlled by reservoirs built for
irrigation and/or hydroelectric power generation. Socioeconomic analysis of this
situation is much more direct than the consideration of the total-area of effect
which may well extend into areas completely dissimilar in their need or desire for
additional water. The spatial expansion of the area of effect may increase or de-
crease the economic and societal justification for a weather modification program.
The political and legal consideration may also be complicated by this expansion in
scope since effects will frequently extend across state or national borders.81
The strongest evidence of extended area effects is provided by data
from projects which involved the seeding of wintertime storm systems.
Statistical analyses of precipitation measurements from these projects
suggest an increase in precipitation during seeded events of 10 to 50
percent over an area of several thousand square kilometers. Some of the
evidence for these effects, based mostly on post hoc analyses of project
data, appears fairly strong, though it remains somewhat suggestive and
speculative in general.98
Based upon two general kinds of evidence: (1) observational evi-
dence of a chemical or physical nature and (2) the results of large
scale/long-term analyses ; a workshop group examining the extended
area effects from winter orographic cloud-seeding projects assembled
the information in table 11. It should be noted that the quality of the
evidence, indicated in the last column of the table, varies from "well
documented" and "good evidence" to "unknown" and "no documenta-
tion available;" however, the general kinds of extended area and
extended time effects from a number of winter projects are illustrated.99
95 Brown. Keith J., Robert D. Elliott, and Max Edelstein, "Transactions of Workshop on
Extended Space and Time Effect of Weather Modification," Aug. 8-12, 1977, Fort Collins,
Coio North American Weather Consultants, Goleta, Calif., February 1978. 279 pp.
«* Ibid., pp. 7-9.
67 Ibid., p. 13.
68 Ibid., p. 10.
"Warburton, Joseph A.. "Extended Area Effects From Winter-orographic Cloud Seeding
Projects," report of workshop panel. In Keith J. Brown, et al. "Transactions of Workshop
on Extended Space and Time Effects of Weather Modification," Aug. 8-12, 1977, Fort Col-
lins, Colo. North American Weather Consultants, Goleta, Calif., February 1978, pp. 137-164.
126
TABLE 11.— EVIDENCE OF EXTENDED AREA EFFECTS FROM WINTER OROGRAPHIC SEEDING PROJECTS, BASED UPON
EVIDENCE FROM (A) OBSERVATIONS AND (B) LARGE-SCALE/LONG-TERM ANALYSES
[From Warburton, 19781
A. OBSERVATIONAL-PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL
Observation
Magnitude
Type of effect of effect Area of effect Mechanism
Quality of
evidence
Ice crystal anvil production Spatial and
from dry ice seeding of time,
cumulus clouds, Blu3
Mountains, Australia.
Time
Persistence of ice nuclei at
Climax— probably Agl for
days after seeding.
Transport of Agl from Climax Spatial,
generators to 30 km down-
wind.
Silver in snow.Sierra Nevada do.
and Rockies— up to 100 km
from generators.
Produced rain
6-12 mm
over 18-hour
period.
lOOXnatural
nuclei con-
centration.
30 N/liter
(-20° C).
4 to 100X
background.
1500 km2 Cirrus seeding Documentation
and transport needed (is
of crystals available),
from seeding
with C02.
Unknown Unknown Well documented
(is available).
~40 km2 Transport of Few aircraft
nuclei. observations.
Pressure reductions in seeded
band periods, Santa Bar-
Cirrus shield produced by
airborne seeding, Warra-
gamba, Australia.
Time Max. —2 mb.
.do.
Up to 25 per-
cent of
seeded days.
Continuum from
generators.
Continuum from
seeding
sites < — 1000
km2).
2000 km2(l
aircraft).
Physical trans-
port of Agl
on hydro-
meter's con-
taining Agl.
Dynamic heat
ing.
Ice crystal
seeding of
lower clouds.
5 yr of observa-
tions.
Fair to moderate
documenta-
tion.
Documentation
needed (is
available).
B. RESULTS OF LARGE-SCALE/LONG-TERM ANALYSES
Projection description Type of effect
Magnitude of effect Area of effect
Quality of evidence
Spatial 30 percent > 40-
yr, average, 3
successive yr.
Time; long-term 10 to 40 percent.
Spatial +25 percent.
Victoria, Australia, drought
relief— non-randomized.
Warragamba and other large-
scale experiments — Aus-
tralia decrease in S/NS
ratio wth years of experi-
ment. 1
Israel I— randomized north
and central seeded.
Santa Barbara band seed- do +25 percent (+50
ing— randomized. percent in bands).
Santa Barbara storm seeding do Unknown
of multiple bands.
Time Seed/no seed ratios
of 1.5 to 4 mean
50 percent-in-
crease.
Spatial Unknown analysis
continuing.
35,000 km2; conti-
nuum from seed-
ing sites.
Artifact of analysis..
6,000 km2; conti-
nuum from seed-
ing sites.
3,000 km2; conti-
nuum from seed-
ing sites.
Unknown
Santa Barbara duration of
seeded/nonseeded bands.
Climax and east to plains of
Colorado using "homo-
geneous" data base deter-
mined by new synoptic
technique.
3,000 km2; conti-
nuum from seed-
ing sites.
600 km*; 130 km
east of Climax,
30 to 50 km
south of Denver.
No documentation
available.
Reanalysis needed
avoiding ratios
and double ratios.
Reliable records for
analysis.
Moderately well
documented.
Unknown.
Good evidence.
Speculative.
'Tasmania experiment may confirm artifact.
Examination of data from summertime convective cloud-seeding
projects reveals "more mixed"' results by comparison with data from
wintertime projects, when extended area effects are considered. This
general conclusion accords with the mixed results from evaluations
of convective cloud seeding within the target area. It was concluded
by participants on a panel at the 1977 Fort Collins workshop that,
for summertime convective cloud seeding, there are statistical evi-
dences of both increases and decreases in the extended area, though
there are a large number of nonstatistically significant indications.
Table 12 was assembled by the panel to summarize the characteristics
of these effects for each of the projects examined.1
1 Smith. T. B.. "Report of Panel on Rummer Weather Mortification." In Keith J. Brown
et al., "Transactions of Workshop on Extended Spare and Time Effects of Weather Modi-
fication." Aug. 8-12. 1077. Eort Collins, Colo. North American Weather Consultants. Goleta.
Calif.. February 1978. pp. 228-326.
127
§52
IS"
net
ra = 5 c
Q. o 2 o
a
o
E
E
TO
5
3 ^ s .
2 20J2- § E co
£ e|c> Eo
q a. a a.
Lu-'e
' 00 CO 00
00Z CflZyjZ
I +< I I I I <
E w °-
M «
5 »= =
a
>- e
P
Sir
CJ O
If
00 00
00 00
I I
.5 oo o
E
s
5 £
coQ-
o o
o « •»
> a>
io OX)
h— o-E
2 £
2 I
o <
128
It was the general consensus of the 1977 workshop participants
that seeding can effect precipitation changes over relatively large
areas which extend beyond the typical target area. Such changes can
be positive or negative and may be of the same sign as the effect in
the designated target area or of opposite sign. For example, among
summertime projects considered the Israeli experiment provided sub-
stantial evidence for positive effects in the target and in the extended
areas (see table 12). Project Whitetop and the Arizona experiment,
on the other hand, showed strong evidence of precipitation decreases
in the target areas, downwind, and in surrounding areas. The Florida
area cumulus experiment (FACE) revealed significant rainfall in-
creases in the target area, but seemed to show decreases in surround-
ing areas, and the 1969-1972 South Dakota project demonstrated
negative seeding effects in the target area and positive effects in ex-
tended areas. Of all projects reviewed, however, and in view of all the
differing results suggested, the combination of target- and extended-
area effects which appears to have the least support is that combina-
tion most likely to occur to many lay people, i.e., increases in the tar-
get area with compensating decreases in some area "downwind" —
the "robbing Peter to pay Paul" analogy.2
Statistical evidence of extended area and time effects seems to be
reasonably common; however, the mechanics causing these effects
are not understood. It appears that there may be a number of mech-
anisms which come into play, the dominating ones operating under
various storm types and seeding techniques. In some projects there
is evidence that seeding intensified the storm dynamically through
release of latent heat of sublimation. In other cases silver iodide has
been transported for distances of 100 kilometers downwind of the
seeding area and has persisted for several days in the atmosphere
after seeding. Also ice crystals produced from seeding may, in turn,
seed lower clouds downwind.3
With particular regard to extended area or time effects in cumulus
seeding experiments, Simpson and Dennis have identified the follow-
ing list of possible causes :
1. Physical transport of the seeding agent.
2. Physical transport of ice crystals produced by a seeding agent.
3. Changes in radiation and thermal balance, as for example, from
cloud shadows or wetting of the ground.
4. Evaporation of water produced.
5. Changes in the air-earth boundary, such as vegetation changes
over land or changes in the structure of the ocean boundary layer
following cloud modification.
6. Dynamic effects:
(a) Intensified subsidence surrounding the seeded clouds, com-
pensating for invigorated updrafts.
(b) Advection or propagation of intensified cloud systems
which subsequently interact with orography or natural
circulations.
(c) Cold thunderstorm downdrafts, either killing local convec-
tion or sotting off new convection cells elsewhere.
sp.rnwn. et nl., "Trnnsnotions of the Workshop on Extended Space and Time Effects of
Weather Mortification." 1978, p. 11.
' Ihid.. p. 12.
129
(d) Extended space-time consequences of enhancement or sup-
pression of severe weather owing to cumulus modification.
(e) Alteration, via altered convection, of wind circulation pat-
terns and/or their transports which could interact with other cir-
culations, perhaps at great distances.4
Kecommended research activities to further explore and develop
understanding of extended area and extended time effects of weather
modification are summarized in the final section of this chapter, along
with other research recommendations.5
APPROACHES TO WEATHER MODIFICATION OTHER THAN SEEDING
Nearly all of the techniques discussed earlier for modifying the
weather involve some kind of "cloud seeding." The exception is in the
case of warm fog dispersal, where attempts to dissipate have also
included mechanical mixing or application of heat. While most cloud-
seeding techniques involve the use of artificial ice nuclei such as those
provided by silver iodide particles, other "seeding" substances, such
as dry ice, sodium chloride, urea, propane, and water spray, have been
used in certain applications. Clouds have also been seeded with metal-
ized plastic chaff in order to dissipate electrical charge build-up and
reduce the incidence of lightning.
There may also be some promise in future years of beneficially
changing the weather, over both large and small scales of time and
space, using technologies that are not in the general category of cloud
seeding. Indeed, some such schemes have been proposed and there has
been research conducted on a number of these possibilities.
In the following chapter the effects of man's activities and. some nat-
ural phenomena in changing the weather unintentionally will be dis-
cussed. While these inadvertent effects may be of general concern and
should be studied in view of potential dangers, they should also
be understood inasmuch as they may provide valuable clues on how
the atmosphere can be more efficiently modified for beneficial purposes.
For example, major heat sources judiciously located might be used
to affect weather in ways useful to man.
Solution of problems which overlap considerations of both weather
and energy could be investigated and solved in common by scientists
and engineers working in both fields. Such research should be under-
way and some practical applications could be forthcoming during
the 1980's. Dissipation of supercooled clouds and fog over large and
medium-sized cities, which now appears to be technically feasible, may
become desirable when solar energy collectors are more common. Ee-
duction of radiative losses to space could be facilitated by allowing
the clouds to reform at night. It is speculated that this diurnal cycle
of operation would tend to weaken inversions that are often associated
with fog and low stratus and so tend to alleviate problems of air
pollution, though there might be some increase of photochemical
effects in the daytime with additional sunlight.6
Excess heat and moisture from nuclear and other powerplants and
from their cooling towers could be usefully employed for generating
4 Simpson and Dennis, "Cumulus Clouds and Their Modification," 19,74, pp. 274-277.
5 See p. 143.
6 Dennis and Gagln, "Recommendations for Future Research In Weather Modification,"
1977, p. 79.
130
clouds if the plants are optimally located with regard to water sources
and meteorological conditions. The clouds so formed might be used for
protection to crops during periods of intense heat or as a shield over a
city at night to prevent re-radiation of heat back to space. The clouds
might also be seeded subsequently somewhere downwind of the power-
plant to enhance precipitation.
Recently, Simpson reviewed and summarized the state of research
and development of a number of the nonseeding approaches to weather
modification which have been proposed.7 She discusses effects of
changes to radiation and to sea-air interface processes :
Some expensive, brute force successes have been obtained by burning fuels to
clear fogs or even to create clouds. A more ingenious approach is to use solar heat
to alter part of the air-surface boundary or a portion of the free atmosphere.
Black and Tarmy (1963) proposed ten by ten kilometer asphalt ground coatings
to create a "heat mountain"' to enhance rain, or to reduce pollution by breaking
through an inversion. Recently Gray, et al. (1975) have suggested tapping solar
energy with carbon dust over 100-1,000 times larger areas for numerous weather
modification objectives ranging from rain enhancement to snow melt, cirrus pro-
duction, and storm modification. The physical hypotheses have undergone pre-
liminary modelling with promising results, while the logistics appear marginally
feasible. Drawbacks are the unknown and uncontrollable transport of the dust
and its environmental unattractiveness.
A cleaner way of differentially heating the air appears to be a possible future
byproduct of the space program. A Space Solar Power Laboratory is in the plan-
ning stages at NASA. Its main purpose is to provide electric power, which will
be sent by the space laboratory to the earth's surface. The microwave power
will be converted to DC by means of groups of rectifying antennas, which dissi-
pate a fraction of the power into heat. Preliminary calculations * * * indicate that
the atmospheric effect of the estimated heating would be comparable to that by
a suburban area and thus could impact mesoscale processes. Future systems
could dissipate much more heat and could conceivably be a clean way to modify
weather processes. It is not too soon to begin numerical simulation of atmospheric
modifications that later generation systems of this type might be able to achieve.
Radiation alteration appears to be a hopeful weather modification approach
still lacking a developed technology. A cirrus cover has long been welcomed as
natural frost protection when it restricts the nocturnal loss of long-wave radia-
tion. More recently, the effect of cirrus in cutting off short-wave daytime radia-
tion has been modelled and measured. * * * Artificial simulation of cirrus effects
by minute plastic bubbles impregnated with substances to absorb selected wave-
lengths received preliminary attention . . . but, to my knowledge has not been
pursued.
Alteration of the sea-air interface is also a potentially promising weather
modification technique, particularly to suppress convection or to mitigate the de-
struction by tropical hurricanes. However, the technology in this area may be
farther from actual field trials than that in radiation. If methods could be de-
veloped to restrict sea-air latent and sensible heat flux, the development from
tropical storm to hurricane might be inhibited, while not losing rainfall or other
benefits of the system. Presently the monomolecular films which cut down the
evaporation from reservoirs do not stay intact in oceanic storm conditions, even
if the logistics of their delivery over wide areas ahead of the storm were solved.
Logistic obstacles have also impeded implementation of the promising idea of
cooling the waters ahead of the hurricane by mixing up the ocean layer above the
thermocline.8
One possible means of achieving the mixing of ocean layers to cool
the sea surface, suggested above by Simpson, might be accomplished,
7 Simpson. Joanne, "What Weather Modification Needs." 1977, unpublished, pp. 13--1.".
(Most of the needs of weather modification identified In this unpublished paper, but not
including her summary of nonseeding approaches, were published in another paper with
the same title by Dr. Simpson : preprints of "Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent
Weather Modification." Champaign, 111., Oct. 10-13. 1977. Boston, American Meteorological
Society. 1977, pp. 304-307.
8 Ibid.
131
at least in part, as a beneficial byproduct of another power source
under development — the ocean thermal energy conversion (OTEC)
concept. The OTEC plants, located in tropical waters where hurri-
canes are spawned and grow, can provide surface cooling and so assist,
at least in localized areas, in the abatement of tropical storms and their
attendant damages. This is another area of overlap between energy
and weather interests where cooperative research and development
ought to be explored.
Research Needs for the Development of Weather Modification
In previous sections of this chapter the rationale and the status of
development of the various techniques used to modify several kinds of
weather phenomena were summarized and discussed in some detail.
Applications of these techniques in both operational and research proj-
ects were considered and some measures of the current effectiveness
were presented. Among these discussions were a variety of statements,
some explicit and some implied, on further research necessary to ad-
vance weather modification technology. This section addresses re-
search needs more generally and in a more sysf'matic manner.
Included are specific requirements and recommendations identified by
individual experts and organizations. Recommendations of a policy
nature on weather modification research, such as the role of the Federal
Government and the organizational structure for managing research,
are discussed in chapter 6, which summarizes the recommendations of
major policy studies. Current research programs of Federal agencies
are discussed in some detail in chapter 5.
Research recommendations summarized in this section are primarily
concerned with advancing the technology of advertent weather modi-
fication intended for beneficial purposes. Research needs in support
of other aspects of planned weather modification and on inadvertent
modification are included in other chapters on those subjects. In some
cases, however, in the following sets of recommendations, research
efforts in these other areas are included with those dealing with tech-
nology improvement in order to preserve the completeness of the par-
ticular set of recommendations.
general considerations
Peter Hobbs identifies four main phases through which most devel-
oping technologies such as weather modification must pass — the estab-
lishment of scientific feasibility, engineering development, demonstra-
tion projects, and full-scale plant operation.9 He illustrates these
phases in terms of relative expenditures and elapsed time for each in
figure 15 and discusses the probable stage of development for weather
modification. Noting that some would optimistically place develop-
ment of the technology as far along as the dashed line YY, he himself
would more cautiously place the progress of weather modification in
the vicinity of XX, so that the major task ahead remains as the testing
of the scientific feasibility to produce significant artificial modification
to the weather.10
9 Hobbs, Peter V., "Weather Modification ; a Brief Review of the Current Status and Sug-
gestion for Future Research." Background paper prepared for the U.S. Department of Com-
merce Weather Modification Advisory Board, March 1977, p. 10.
10 Ibid.
132
This scientific feasibility can best be shown, according to Hobbs,
through "mounting comprehensive research programs to investigate
the structure and natural processes which dominate a few relatively
simple cloud and precipitation systems and to establish the extent and
reliability with which they can be artificially modified." He cites as a
principal reason for the lack of significant progress in recent years his
contention that "most of the effort has been directed at attempts to
modify very complicated storm systems about which little is known
and good hypotheses for artificial modification are lacking." 11
Cumulative
Figure 15. — Schematic of the relative costs and time associated with the four
phases of development of a new technology. The vertical lines XX and YY
indicate two widely differing views on the present stage of development of
weather modification technology. (From Hobbs, 1977.)
We have seen that there is some reason to accept weather modifica-
tion techniques as having some degree of operational capability in
possibly two areas — cold fog dispersal and snowfall enhancement from
orographic clouds — though there is room for continued research and
technique development in these as well as other areas of weather modi-
fication. Although supercooled fogs accoimt for only 5 percent of all
fog occurrences, their prevalence at airports in northeastern and
northwestern North America makes cold fog dispersal a valuable tool.
Seeding of wintertime orographic clouds in experiments and opera-
tional projects in the western United States has probably resulted in
snowfall increases of 10 to 30 percent under cert am conditions.
Table 13 is a review and general outlook on weather modification,
prepared by Ohangnon, showing the stage of development, possible
economic value or years before operational usefulness, and status of
research for 5 areas of weather modification, for the cold-tempera-
ture and warm -temperature cases where applicable. The. table also
shows Changnon's rough estimate of the complexity and difficulty in
11 Ibid., pp. 10-12.
133
relation to fog dispersal of the development of modification techniques
for the other phenomena.12
Changnon emphasizes the fact that established techniques do not
exist for significant modification of weather phenomena such as rain-
fall and severe weather over the more populous and major agricul-
tural areas of the eastern United States. He says that :
If measurable economic gains are to be realized in the eastern two-thirds of
the United States due to weather modification (largely rain "management", hail
suppression, and abatement of severe winter storms), much more research and
effort must be extended. This research will concern (1) the thorough study on
a regional scale of the complex multicellular convective systems which are the
major warm season rain and hail producers, and (2) the study of the cold season
cyclonic systems.13
TABLE 13.-0UTL00K FOR PLANNED WEATHER MODIFICATION IN UNITED STATES
[From Changnon, "Present and Future of Weather Modification; Regional Issues," "75]
Fog
Orographic
precipitation
Convective
rainfall
Severe convective Cyclonic scale
storms storms
Cold temperatures Operational phase;
«32°F). low cost;
research
declining.
Operational phase Research phase;
(+10 to +30 favorable on
percent); low
cost; research
declining.
small clouds;
questionable on
large clouds
and systems;
substantial
research.
Research phase;
5 to 10 yrs
before opera-
tional; sub-
stantial and
increasing
research.
Warm tempera- Research phase;
tures (>32° F). 2 to 5 yrs: sub-
stantial and
increasing
research.
Possible phase; Exploratory phase;
little research.1 modest
research.1
Degree of 1.0.
complexity (in
relation to fog).
10.
100
1,000.
Exploratory phase;
more than 10
yrs; research on
tropical is
modest; research
on "other"
storms is minor.
10,000.
Questionable economic value unless chain reaction is found.
Hobbs discusses in detail some of the kinds of weather modification
research projects which he feels would be fruitful :
Some candidate projects for intensive investigation include the dispersal
of cold and warm fogs, the enhancement of precipitation from isolated conti-
nental-type cumulus clouds, and the targeting of winter orographic snowfalls.
Our knowledge of each of these subjects has reached the stage where the mounting
of comprehensive projects is likely to yield definitive results. Physical studies
have demonstrated that cold fogs can be dissipated by seeding with dry ice, and
this technique is now in use operationally at a number of airports ; however, a
statistical study to quantify the reliability of this technique has not (to my
knowledge) been carried out. It could provide the much needed "success story"
for weather modification. The dispersal of warm fogs is a much more difficult
problem which has not yielded to subtle approaches. The U.S. Air Force has
concluded that the best approach to this problem is through direct heat input ; this
approach appears sufficiently promising that it should be subjected to proper
physical and statistical evaluation. The possibility of targeting winter orographic
snowfall to specific areas on the ground (e.g., reservoirs) has been investigated.
. . . The technique shows sufficient promise that further studies involving both
physical and statistical evaluation should be carried out. Attempts at modifying
the precipitation from cumulus clouds dates back to the beginning of modern
weather modification (the 1940's) ; however, very few of these projects have
involved both physical and statistical evaluation (and many have used neither).
12 Changrnon, Stanley A., Jr., "Present and Future of Weather Modification; Regional
Issues," 1975. pp. 172-174.
13 Ibid., p. 172.
134
In view of our growing understanding of the structure and life cycles of individual
cumulus clouds, and the auvances which have been made in the numerical
simulation of these processes, the time is now ripe to mount a substantial investi-
gation to determine whether precipitation from these clouds can be increased.
The primary components of the comprehensive research projects recommended
above should be physical, statistical, and theoretical analysis. Physical evalua-
tions should include comprehensive field studies using a wide range of airborne,
ground, and remote probing techniques to evaluate the natural systems and the
degrees to which they can oe artificially modified. Physical testing and evaluation
of a proposed weather modification technique is best commenced prior to the
establishment of a statistical design, for not only can physical evaluations check
the feasibility of a proposed technique, but they can indicate the conditions under
which it is most likely to be effective and thereby aid in sharpening or the
statistical design. A sound weather modification technique should also be based
on, or supported by, the best theoretical models available for describing the
weather system under investigation. If the theoretical and physical studies
indicate that a particular weather modification technique is effective, a carefully
designed randomized statistical experiment should follow. Theoretical and
physical evaluations should continue through the statistical experiment. An
independent repetition of the experiment in at least one other geo raphieal
area will generally be required. The confluence of results from theoretical, phys-
ical, and statistical analyses carried out in two areas would permit sound
quantitative evaluation of the effectiveness of an artificial modification
technique."
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE 19 7 3 NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES STUDY
In the 1973 study published by the National Academy of Sciences 15
three broad research goals for weather modification were recommended
along with specific research programs and projects required to achieve
those goals. The three goals are :
1. Identification by the year 1980 of the conditions under which
precipitation can be increased, decreased, and redistributed in
various climatological areas through the addition of artificial ice
and condensation nuclei ;
2. Development in the next decade of technology directed
toward mitigating the effects of the following weather hazards :
hurricanes, hailstorms, fogs, and lightning ; and
3. Establishment of a coordinated national and international
system for investigating the inadvertent effects of manmade pol-
lutants, with a target date of 1980 for the determination of the
extent, trend, and magnitude of the effect of various crucial pol-
lutants on local weather conditions and on the climate of the
world.16
Achievement of these national goals would require, according to
the National Academy study, implementation of the following research
efforts, some in support of all three goals and others as a means to
achieving each of the three goals :
A. Recommended research in support of all three goals :
1. More adequate laboratory and experimental field programs
are needed to study the microphysical processes associated with
the development of clouds, precipitation, and thunderstorm
electrification.
14 Hohhs. "Weather Modification ;" a Brief Review of the Current Status and Suggestions
for Future Research," 1977, pp. 12-13.
15 Nnt'onal Academy of Sciences, "Weather and Climate Modification ; Problems and Prog-
ress," 1973.
" Ibid., p. 27.
135
2. There is a need to develop numerical models to describe the
behavior of layer clouds, synoptic storms, orographic clouds, and
severe local clouds.
3. There is a need for the standardization of instrumentation in
seeding devices and the testing of new seeding agents.
4. There should be established a number of weather modifica-
tion statistical research groups associated with the major field
groups concerned with weather modification and the inadvertent
effects of pollutants.
5. There should be created a repository for data on weather
modification activities, and, at a reasonable price, such data should
be made available for reanaiyses of these activities.
B. Recommended research in support of goal 1 above :
1. There is a continuing need for a comprehensive series of
randomized experiments to determine the effects of both artificial
and natural ice and cloud nuclei on precipitation in the principal
meteorological regimes in the United States.
2. Investigations into the feasibility of redistributing winter
precipitation should be continued and expanded.
3. Experiments need to be designed so that the effects of seeding
on precipitation outside the primary area of interest can be
evaluated.
4. Studies of the effects of artificial seeding on cumulus clouds
and the numerical modeling of the seeding process should be con-
tinued and expanded.
C. Recommended research in support of goal 2 above :
1. Investigations should be made to determine whether the seed-
ing techniques presently used in the study of isolated cumlus
clouds and in hurricane modification can be extended to, or new
techniques developed for, the amelioration of severe thunder-
storms, hailstorms, and even tornadoes.
2. An expanded program is needed to provide continuous birth-
to-death observations of hurricanes from above, around, within,
and beneath seeded and nonseeded hurricanes and for testing of
existing and new techniques for reducing hurricane intensities.
3. Studies on the development of hurricane-modification tech-
niques should include a randomization scheme in the design and
conduct of experimental programs.
4. A major national effort in fundamental research on hailstorms
and hailstorm modification should be pursued aggressively.
5. A comprehensive program dealing with research on warm
fog and its dissipation should be undertaken.
6. A high priority should be given to the development of a vari-
ety of research techniques specifically designed for observing
severe storms.
D. Recommended research in support of goal 3 above :
1. National and international programs should be developed
for monitoring the gaseous and particulate content of the atmos-
phere, with particular emphasis on modification by man's
activities.
2. Satellite programs should be developed to monitor continu-
ally, on a global basis, the cloud cover, albedo, and the heat bal-
ance of the atmosphere.
136
3. There should be enlarged programs to measure those para-
meters that describe the climate of cities and adjoining country-
sides and to determine the physical mechanisms responsible for
these differences.
4. Continued strong support should be provided to the major
effort now underway, known as the Global Atmospheric Research
Program, to develop properly parameterized mathematical models
of the global atmosphere-ocean system, to obtain the observational
data to test their efficacy, and to provide the computers that permit
simulation of the effects of human activities on a worldwide scale.17
Some of the recommended research activities discussed above were
already underway at the time of the 1973 National Academy study,
but continuation or expansion of these efforts were advised. Since that
time others have been initiated, and beneficial results from continua-
tion and expansion of earlier efforts have been achieved. The overall
decrease in funding of the Federal research program in the past few
years has resulted in curtailments of valuable research projects identi-
fied to meet the goals above, however, and the current level of research
activities can hardly lead to achievement of the goals set by the Acad-
emy study. The recent history of Federal funding for weather modi-
fication is discussed and summarized in chapter 5, as part of the treat-
ment on Federal activities.18
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADVANCED PLANNING GROUP OF NOAA
Concerned that its research programs be more responsible to societal
needs, the Weather Modification Project Office of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) established a small ad-
vanced planning group in 1976. Consisting of one full-time and three
part-time members, none of whom were permanent NOAA employees,
the advanced planning group was charged with making recommenda-
tions and preliminary plans for research projects to be carried out
over the following 10 to 15 years. The group set about its task by
visiting various user groups to learn opinions about past Federal
research and by reviewing available literature and consulting scien-
tists on past and current weather modification field programs.19
The advanced planning group acknowledged that considerable prog-
ress had been made in weather modification in the past few years,
but noted that the current research approach has the following short-
comings :
1. Research in the United States on stimulation of precipitation
has been concentrated in the semiarid western States and in Flor-
ida rather than in the Corn Belt, where the potential economic
payoff is much greater.
2. Research on stimulation of rainfall and on suppression of
hail and lightning have been carried out in separate projects. A
single project dedicated to the concept of precipitation manage-
ment in large convective clouds would be more likely to solve the
problem of changing hailfall and rainfall simultaneously to pro-
duce net economic benefits.
» Ibid., pp. 27-30.
18 Sop n 242.
w Dennis Arnott S. and A. Gaprln. "Rocommendat'ons for Future Research in Weather
Modification," Weather Modification Program Office. Environmental Research T.aboartories,
Nntionm Ocennic nnr] Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bouldei*
Colo., November 1977, 112 pp.
137
3. Weather modification has usually been equated with cloud
seeding. Other possible means of modifying the weather have
been largely ignored.
4. Weather modification is usually considered in isolation,
rather than as an integral part of a total response to weather-
related problems. There are exceptions : dry ice seeding to improve
visibility during cold- fog episodes at airports is normally viewed
as a supplement to, rather than a replacement for, good instru-
ment landing systems. However, cloud seeding to increase pre-
cipitation is sometimes viewed as an alternative to irrigation or
water conservation measures, a situation we think is regrettable.
Fortunately, research in inadvertent weather modification is tend-
ing to break down the artificial isolation of research related to
weather modification from other aspects of atmospheric science.20
Having examined the current weather modification research situa-
tion as perceived by user groups and research scientists, the NOAA
Advanced Planning Group proceeded to formulate recommendations
for future research, using certain general technical, economic and soci-
ological guidelines. Proposed research was evaluated on the basis of
answers to the following questions :
1. Will the project advance scientific understanding of atmos-
pheric processes and thereby contribute to an improved capability
to modify weather on a predictable basis ?
2. Will the operational capability toward which the project is
directed provide net economic benefit?
3. Are the proposed research and the possible subsequent appli-
cations socially acceptable % 21
The group completed its study during 1977 and provided its recom-
mended research program to NOAA's Weather Modification Project
Office. The 5 specific recommendations are summarized below :
1. Work should be continued to determine the potential for in-
creasing rainfall from convective clouds in warm, humid air
masses by seeding for dynamic effects. Design of a new, compre-
hensive project to be conducted in the eastern half of the United
States should begin immediately. This project should gather in-
formation on the effects of seeding upon rainfall, hail, lightning,
and thunderstorm winds both within and outside a fixed target
area. Additional field studies in Florida to establish the physical
mechanisms responsible for the apparent increases in total target
rainfall during FACE 22 in 1975-76 should be performed during
at least two seasons in parallel with the design of the new project.
The results of the additional studies would be valuable input for
the design of the new comprehensive experiment.
2. Because of the promising beginnings of the Sierra Coopera-
tive Project on orographic precipitation and the HIPLEX 23 work
on cumulus clouds in the semiarid western States, and because the
projects are likely to produce important results of wide applica-
20 Ibid., p. 8.
a Ibid., pp. 8-9.
22 The Florida Area Cumulus Experiment (FACE), an experimental project sponsored by
NOAA's discussed under activities of the U.S. Department of Commerce in ch. 5. p. 292.
23 The Sierra Cooperative Project and the High Plains Cooperative Program (HIPLEX)
are projects sponsored under the Division of Atmospheric Water Resources Management of
the Bureau of Reclamation in the U.S. Department of the Interior. These projects are dis-
cussed in ch. 5, pp. 258 and 263, respectively.
138
tion, we see no reason for new initiatives in these areas until those
projects are completed.
3. In view of the need for more detailed knowledge of hurricane
behavior, we recommend that research on hurricane modification
be continued with the understanding that the research is a long-
term effort with potenial payoff 10 to 20 years away. We recom-
mend further that modeling and other theoretical work be intensi-
fied to provide a better basis for interpretation of data from
seeding trials.
4. Concepts for hail suppression and lightning suppression
should be subjected to fundamental reappraisal before the resump-
tion of any field experiments.
5. Long-range planning should be continued toward "futuristic"
projects in which problems in deliberate, large-scale weather mod-
ification, inadvertent weather modification, forecasting, and agri-
cultural climatology would be treated together rather than
separately.24
SUMMARY OF FEDERAL RESEARCH NEEDS EXPRESSED BY STATE OFFICIALS
At the request of NOAA's Advanced Planning Group, whose study
was discussed in the previous section, the North American Interstate
Weather Modification Council (NAIWMC) 25 compiled information
on recommended Federal weather modification research, based on the
needs of users within NAIWMC member States. Opinions of State offi-
cials on needed research were obtained from 16 States through meet-
ings sponsored by California, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Da-
kota. Texas, and Utah and through questionnaires sent out by the
NAIWMC during 1976 and 1977.
Table 14 summarizes results of the NAIWMC investigation, showing
perceived needs for research for weather modification users, as inter-
preted by the State officials.26 Keyes notes that the major research area
recommended by most State and local governments is in the evalua-
tion of ongoing, long-term operational projects within those States.
Other important research needs expressed were for further develop-
ment of seeding technology and for economic, environmental, and
societal studies necessary for eventual public acceptance of weather
modification.27
15 The purposes, organization, and activities of the North American Interstate Weather
Modification Council are discussed in some detail in ch. 7. p. 333.
26 Reves. Conrad G.. Jr.. "Federal Research Needs and New Law Requirements in Weather
Modification : the NAIWMC Viewpoint," testimony before the U.S. Department of Commerce
We.ither Modification Advisory Board, Champaign, 111., Oct. 14. 1977.
» Ibid.
139
TABLE 14. — SUMMARY OF FEDERAL WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH NEEDS, DETERMINED FROM
OPINIONS OF STATE OFFICIALS DURING STATE MEETINGS AND THROUGH QUESTIONNAIRES FROM THE
NORTH AMERICAN INTERSTATE WEATHER MODIFICATION COUNCIL
[From Keyes, 1977; table format from Dennis and Gagin, 1977]
Major categories of research i
State
Arizona a, b, c a, b, e... a, b, c
California a, b, c a, b a, b, c
Illinois a, b, c a, b, c, d. a, b, c Yes
Indiana b, c a, b, c, e. b, c Yes
Kansas a, b, c b, c a, c
Maryland a, b, c b, c Yes Yes.
Michigan a, b, c b, c a Yes
Missouri a, b a, c
North Carolina 2
North Dakota a b, c, e c a.
Pennsylvania c c Yes Yes
South Dakota a, b, c b, c c
Texas a, c a, b, d... c a, c.
Utah a, b b, d a
Vermont a a a a, c.
Virginia s
• Categories of Federal research:
1. Evaluation:
a. Of operational programs.
b. Physical studies.
c. Extra-area effects.
2. Seeding technology:
a. New seeding agents.
b. Transport and diffusion, delivery methods.
c. Hail suppression methods.
d. New tools, for example, satellites.
e. Public education.
3. Economic, ecological, and societal studies:
a. Economic benefits.
b. Toxicity of agents.
c. Societal studies.
4. Detection of clandestine seeding.
5. Inadvertent weather modification.
6. Forecasting:
a. Short range.
b. Local topographic effects.
c. Long range.
3 Need a national policy first.
3 Mainly hurricane modification.
RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AMS COMMITTEE ON WEATHER
MODIFICATION
Recently, the chairman of the Committee on Weather Modifica-
tion of the American Meteorological Society 28 summarized his com-
mittee's recommendations on recommended weather modification re-
search needs.29 It was noted that the primary focus of such research
should be in the areas of purposeful alteration of patterns of cloud
systems and precipitation and in the inadvertent impact of man's
activities. In view of critical water problems affecting large portions
of the country and the potential for increased demand for application
of weather modification techniques by water users, the necessity for
improved understanding of underlying physical processes through
pursuit of basic research was emphasized. In particular, the "real
payoff" to improvements in purposeful weather modification should
be seen as coming from increased ability to understand, predict, and
28 Weather modification activities of the American Meteorological Society and purposes
and concerns of its Committee on Weather Modification are discussed in ch. 8, p. 395.
29 Silverman. Bernard A., testimonv before the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather
Modification Advisory Board, Champaign, 111.. Oct. 14. 1977.
140
control the formation and development of mesoscale 30 cloud systems.31
Subject areas for recommended research to accomplish basic under-
standing of atmospheric processes necessary for the development of
weather modification technology were presented by the AMS com-
mittee in the following outline form : 32
M esoscale Cloud Dynamics
A. Effect of seeding on convective cloud development and
evolution :
1. Growth of convective clouds.
2. Merger of clouds into groups and systems.
3. Organization of inflow (coupling of midtroposphere with
the boundary layer).
4. Enhanced moisture budget efficiency.
B. Interaction of clouds with each other and with their environ-
ment :
1. Response to mesoscale forcing function.
2. Relationship between low-level convergence and cloud field
evolution.
3. Role of outdrafts in development and sustenance of cloud
systems.
4. Role of anvils in the evolution of the cloud field.
C. Precipitation "nowcasting" :
1. Low-level convergence field as predictor of precipitation
intensity.
2. Kinematic and thermodynamic predictors and covariates for
statistical evaluation.
D. Need for a multidisciplined mesoscale experiment with strong
physical emphasis.
Precip itation Microp hysics
A. Evolution of natural ice in cloud :
1. Nucleation processes.
2. Secondary ice production processes :
(a) Laboratory studies of causality.
(b) Field investigations to define' appropriate in-cloud
criteria for multiplication of ice.
B. Interaction between microphysics and dynamics to produce and
sustain precipitation.
C. Effect of seeding on (A) and (B) above.
D. Distinction between microstructure of clouds developing over
land and over water in terms of suitability for seeding.
E. Clarification of microstructure of clouds developing within the
hurricane environment in terms of suitability for seeding.
F. Cloud microstructure climatology for selected regions of the
United States.
G. Effect of ice generation on charge separation and electrification
30 Mpsosealo meteorological phenomena are those with horizontal dimensions ranging from
a few tens of kilometers to a few hundred kilometers.
a Silverman, testimony before Weather Modification Advisory Board, 1977.
» Ibid.
141
Area of Seeding Effect
A. Induced by dynamic response of environment.
B. Induced by diffusion of nucleating material :
1. In orographic regions.
2. Transport through convective processes.
C. Insolation pattern resulting from mid- and upper-level outflow.
Turbulence and Diffusion
A. Targeting of surface-based source (s) of nuclei into desired cloud
region.
B. Entrainment processes related to cloud development.
C. Spread of nuclei released in cloud (spatial and temporal
distribution).
Seeding Agents and Methods
A. Nucleation efficiency studies.
B. Particle sizing and composition analyses.
C. Particle generation systems.
D. Improvement of technology.
Cloud Climatology for Technology Applicability
A. National in scope.
B. Frequency of occurrence of clouds by type.
C. Cloud base and cloud top heights for selected regions.
D. Properties of in-cloud microstructure.
E. Aerosol characteristics.
F. Radar population studies.
G. Precipitation statistics.
H. Model-derived "seedability" assessment.
Inadvertent Impacts
A. Effect on climatic change.
B. Effect on air quality.
,C. Effect on meteorology near large urban regions :
1. Thermal pattern.
2. Precipitation.
3. Cloudiness.
D. Effect on meteorology near deforested areas.
Cloud M odeling
A. Synthesis of numerical simulation with atmospheric observations
on all scales.
B. Inclusion of cloud interaction and outdraft convergence.
C. Mesoscale forcing (e.g. sea breeze, topography, etc.).
Improved Methods of Statistical Design and Evaluation
A. Required to interpret results of new mesoscale experiment.
B. Required for extraction of physical information from previously-
performed nonrandomized experiments.
34-857 O - 79 - 12
142
Study of oak brush as elk forage — part of environmental research conducted
part of Project Skywater. (Courtesy of the Bureau of Reclamation.)
143
RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO EXTENDED AREA AND TIME
EFFECTS
At the 1977 workshop on the extended area and extended time ef-
fects of weather modification, participants developed some recommen-
dations for future research into these effects.33 The following research
activities, not necessarily in any order of priority, were recommended
to be undertaken immediately with current available tools or over a
period of time, as appropriate :
The use of computer simulation and modeling can provide
important information on the areal coverage and magnitude of the
effects of weather modification. It can also define the types of in-
formation and the sensitivity required for future field
experiments.
Models developed to detect moisture depletion in natural and
seeded cases as an airmass moves over successive mountain ridges
should be applied and verified by field measurements in an area
with a minimum of complexities caused by the introduction of new
moisture sources. In situ measurements of temperature, pressure,
liquid water content, ice crystal concentrations, and precipitation
on the ground and in the air will be needed as inputs to the model
and for model validation.
An intensive study should be initiated on particulate transport,
including the transport of both seeding material and ice crystals
produced by seeding. Techniques are currently available to
measure ice crystal concentrations, nuclei, and silver in precipi-
tation. Special tracers are becoming available and should be de-
veloped further. Eemote sensing techniques for measuring ice and
water need further development.
A re-analysis of some past field programs could be undertaken
immediately. (The question of apparent decreases in seeding ef-
fectiveness in successive years of the Australian experiment has
not been resolved adequately as to whether this effect is real or an
analysis artifact. The reported persistence of ice nuclei for days
after seeding at Climax and its relationship to the apparent
decrease in the seed/no seed ratios with time should be further
investigated.)
Continuing monitoring should be initiated of such quantities
as ice nuclei concentrations in project areas in order to establish
new benchmarks. A modeling effort should also be undertaken to
investigate the evaporation and reprecipitation processes.
Studies of wide-area effects from seeding summer convective
storm systems may require more preliminary work before mount-
ing a major field effort since less is known about these phenomena.
These studies should be directed toward acquiring information
about the possible redistribution of convective instability and the
microphysical effects including the transport of ice nuclei and/ or
ice crystals, and the possible interactive effects when these par-
ticles are entrained into other cloud systems.
Prior to the design of a major wide-area study program, initial
studies should include : cloud population studies, including time
33 Brown, et al.. "Transactions of the Workshop on Extended Space and Time Effects of
Weather Modification," 1978, pp. 14-18.
144
and space distributions and cloud microphysics ; hypothesis de-
velopment, including numerical modeling ; reexamination of pre-
vious experimental programs ; augmentation of ongoing programs
to study total-area effects; and development of new capabilities
including satellite measurements, rain gage network design, data
processing, and management and seeding delivery systems.
The final design of a field program will be dependent on the
findings from these preliminary studies. It appears likely that it
will be necessary to mount a major effort to determine the total-
area effects and mechanics of convective storm seeding. Prelimi-
nary estimates call for a 10-year studv covering nn area of at least
a 300-mile radius in the mid-United States. Ideally this study
could be operated in conjunction with other mesoscale field studies
in cumulus convection and precipitation forecasting.
A national technology assessment on precipitation modification
should be conducted with the total-area effect included in both
the physical science and social science context.34
a* Ibid.
CHAPTER 4
INADVERTENT WEATHER AND CLIMATE
MODIFICATION
(By John R. Justus, Analyst in Earth Science, Science Policy Research Division,
Congressional Research Service)
Out of the total ensemble of environmental factors, the subset which
is sensed most immediately and directly by man and which has the
greatest integrated impact on human activities is that which is sub-
sumed under the terms of iveather and climate. — Earl W. Barrett,
1975, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Introduction
The relationship between man and weather has been basically the
one stated succinctly by Charles Dudley Warner: Everybody talked
about the weather, but nobody did anything about it. In the 1940's,
however, the discovery that clouds could be modified by additions of
freezing nuclei created a realization that, at some times and places at
least, it might be possible to do something about the weather. This
entering wedge into the field of intentional or planned weather modi-
fication has since been heavily studied and exploited ; it had, as a by-
product, the creation of considerable interest in weather modification
on the part of both the scientific community and the general popula-
tion. The science and technology of planned weather modification are'
discussed in chapter 3. The possibility that man has, in fact, been doing
something about the weather without knowing it has become a subject
for serious consideration, and chapter 4 reviews a number of processes
and mechanisms governing inadvertent weather and climate modifi-
cation.
TERMINOLOGY
By way of clarification, it is important to appreciate the fact that
differences of scale are implied in the terms "weather modification"
and "climate modification."
Climate
To most everyone, the term climate usually brings to mind an aver-
age regime of weather or the average temperature and precipitation
of a locality. This is a rather misleading concept, for the average may
be a rare event. Actually, weather from year to year oscillates widely
so that climate is a statistical complex of many values and variables,
including the temperature of the air, water, ice, and land surfaces;
winds and ocean currents ; the air's moisture or humidity ; the cloudi-
ness and cloud water content, groundwater, lake levels, and the water
content of snow and of land and sea ice; the pressure and density of
(145)
146
the atmosphere and ocean; the composition of (dry) air; and the
salinity of the ocean. All of these elements encompass climate and are
interconnected by the various physical and dynamic processes occur-
ring in the system, such as precipitation and evaporation, radiation,
and the transfer of heat and momentum by advection (predominantly
horizontal, large-scale motions of the atmosphere), convection (large-
scale vertical motions of the atmosphere characterized by rising and
sinking air movements), and turbulence (a state of atmospheric flow
typified by irregular, random air movements) .
Climatic fluctuation and climatic change
Rather than by average value, these elements are best characterized
by frequency distributions, which can, in many places, span a wide
range for a given element. Within such a range, one notes irregular
fluctuations characterized by the occurrence of extreme values for given
elements of the climatic system. In such instances, a climatic fluctua-
tion is said to be experienced, not a climatic change. A change denotes
that a new equilibrium had been achieved, and with it, a rather dif-
ferent frequency distribution for all climatic elements. Thus, the term
change is not to be confused with fluctuation, where trends are fre-
quently reversed, even though some successive values may cluster for
a while on one side or the other of the "average."
Weather
Defined as the state of the atmosphere at any given time, the prev-
alent belief of the public, that wherever the weather goes the climate
follows, is fallacious. On the contrary, wherever the climate goes, so
goes the weather. Weather is merely a statistic of the physical climatic
state.
Weather modification
As used in the context of this chapter and in the text at large,
weather modification refers collectively to any number of activities
conducted to intentionally or inadvertently modify, through artificial
means, the elements of weather and, in turn, the occurrence and be-
havior of discrete weather events. Intentional or planned weather
modification activities may be conducted for a variety of different
purposes, including: Increasing or decreasing rain and snow over a
particular area; reducing damage to crops and property from hail;
reducing the number of forest fires that are started by lightning;
removing fog at airports; changing the intensity and direction of
hurricanes so they cause less destruction ; mitigating the destructive-
ness of severe thunderstorms and tornadoes.
Climate modification
This encompasses the planned or inadvertent alteration, through
artificial means, of the elemental properties comprising the air, sea, ice,
land, and biospheric components of the climatic system in order to
effect a new equilibrium among the elements of climate and, conse-
quently, a new climate regime. In most instances, the term alludes to
mesoscale and macroscale climates, from those of regions to the entire
globe. Another common usage is in reference to the microscale climates
of cities where persistent, inadvertent effects on weather, in turn,
modify the climates of greater metropolitan areas.
147
Planned climate modification
While the term climate usually brings to mind an "average" regime
of weather or, more properly, a frequency distribution of the elements
and events of weather, the climatic system itself consists of those
elements and processes that are basically the same as those responsible
for short-term weather and coordinately for the maintenance of the
long-term physical climatic state. It follows, then, that one of the pur-
poses of planned weather modification activities may be to artificially
change the climate of a location or region through means including,
but not necessarily limited to: Massive and protracted extension of
present cloud-seeding operations to influence natural precipitation de-
velopment cycles; intentional initiation of large heat sources to influ-
ence convective circulation or evaporate fog ; intentional modification
of solar radiation exchange or heat balance of the Earth or clouds
through the release of gases, dusts, liquids, or aerosols in the atmos-
phere; planned modification of the energy transfer characteristics of
the Earth's land or water surface by dusting with powders, liquid
sprays or dyes, water impoundment, deforestation, etc.
The dramatic idea of some great technological leap toward purpose-
fully altering climate never seems to lose its appeal. The problem with
these grand schemes is that, even if feasible, every fix — technological
or otherwise — has its toll in side effects. But leaving aside for the
moment the question of whether it makes sense to alter or conserve
climate, many of the schemes that have been suggested for modifying
climate on a hemispheric or global scale have so far been considered to
be on the fringe of science fiction. The range of possibilities widens
rapidly if one imagines the financial resources of the major world
powers available to carry them out. Periodically resurgent are such
schemes as darkening, heating, and melting of the Arctic icepack, the
damming of the Bering Strait, the transportation of Antarctic ice-
bergs, the diverting southward of North American and Asian rivers
that empty into the Arctic, and the modification of tropical storms.1
These and other perennial suggestions are summarized in Figure 1.
iKellogjr. W. W. and S. H. Schneider, "Climate Stabilization: For Better or for Worse?"
Science, vol. 186, Dec. 27, 1974, pp. 1163-1172.
148
Figube 1. — A survey of grandiose schemes that have been proposed to modify or
control climate. (From Kellogg and Schneider, 1974.)
Inadvertent climate modification
The modification processes may also be initiated or triggered in-
advertently rather than purposefully, and the possibility exists that so-
ciety may be changing the climate through its own actions by pushing
on certain leverage points. Inadvertently, we are already causing
measurable variations on the local scale. Artificial climatic effects have
been observed and documented on local and regional scales, partic-
ularly in and downwind of heavily populated industrial areas where
waste heat, particulate pollution and altered ground surface char-
acteristics are primarily responsible for the perceived climate modifi-
cation. The climate in and near large cities, for example, is warmer,
the daily range of temperature is less, and annual precipitation is
greater than if the cities had never been built. The climate of the world
is governed mainly by the globally averaged effects of the Sun, the
location and movement of air masses, and the circulation patterns of
the world ocean. It is by no means clear that the interaction of these
vast forces can be significantly influenced by human activities. Al-
though not verifiable at present, the time may not be far off when
human activities will result in measurable large-scale changes in
weather and climate of more than passing significance. It is important
to appreciate the fact that the role of man at this global level is still
controversial, and existing models of the general circulation are not yet
capable of testing the effects in a conclusive manner.
Nevertheless, a growing fraction of current evidence does point to
the possibility of unprecedented impact on the global climate by
human activities, albeit the effects may be occurring below the thres-
hold where they could be statistically detected relative to the record
149
of natural fluctuations and, therefore, could be almost imperceptible
amid the ubiquitous variability of climate. But while the degree of in-
fluence on world climate may as yet be too small to detect against the
background of natural variations and although mathematical models
of climatic change are still imperfect, significant global effects in the
future are inferred if the rates of growtn of industry and population
persist.
Background
historical perspective
The possibility of climatic alterations by human activity was alluded
to in the scientific literature at the beginning of this century, and again
in the late 1930's, but it received little serious attention until the 1950 s.
The first period of thermonuclear testing, 1954 to 1958, generated a
great deal of concern about drastic and widespread elfects on weather.
It was felt that anything which liberated such great energies must
somehow influence the atmosphere. The fact that a device fired at sea
level or under the sea did create locally a large convective cloud was
cited as evidence.
By about 1960 work had shown that no large-scale or long-term
meteorological effects would ensue from nuclear testing at the levels
conducted in the 1950?s. It had become clear that the inertia of the
atmosphere-ocean system was too large to be perturbed seriously by the
sudden release of any energy man could generate. Instead of the spec-
tacular and violent, it was realized that one would have to look to the
slow and insidious to find evidence of human influences on climate and
weather.
Some evidence that manmade carbon dioxide was accumulating in
the atmosphere appeared as early as 1938. This, together with some
early systematic data from Scandinavia, led to the inclusion of a car-
bon dioxide (C02) measurement program during the International
Geophysical Year (IGY), 1957-1958. This C02 measurement pro-
gram, which continues today, was the first serious scientific study of
a possible manmade climatic influence on a large scale.
As the reality of the C02 effect became established, and as the gen-
eral mood of increased concern for the environment and the concept
of "spaceship Earth" developed during the 1960's, increased scientific
efforts began to be focused on inadvertent weather and climate modi-
fication. It had been recognized for some time that the climates of
cities differed significantly from their rural environs due to the re-
lease of heat and pollutants. It was not until the late 1960's that evi-
dence of "urban effect" on the climate at considerable distances down-
wind began to be noticed. The role of pollution aerosols 2 as climate
modifiers became a topic of great interest, and it remains so today.
In the United States, the attention of the Government to these
problems began with the IGY effort, C02 and solar radiation measure-
ment programs were started in Antarctica and at the Mauna Loa Ob-
servatory in Hawaii, which was established specifically for this pro-
gram by the U.S. Weather Bureau. This station, located at an eleva-
tion of 3,400 meters (11,155 feet) on the north slope of Mauna Loa,
2 Dispersions in tbe atmosphere of particles of matter that remain suspended for a sig-
nificant length of time.
150
has been improved over the years and remains the prototype "bench-
mark" station for climatic change monitoring.
The first major meeting devoted exclusively to the inadvertent
modification problem convened in Dallas, Tex., in December 1968.3
The following year, a series of discussions between some faculty
members of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, government
officials and scientists gave rise to the first working conference, the
Study of Critical Environmental Problems (SCEP). This meeting,
held at Williams College, Wihiamstown, Mass., during July 1970, was
devoted to identifying possible global environmental hazards and
making recommendations concerning monitoring, abatement, et cetera.
The climatic problem areas identified were carbon dioxide and other
trace gases that may affect climate ; particulate matter in the atmos-
phere as turbidity and as cloud modifiers ; waste heat ; changes in the
Earth's surface (land-use changes) ; radioactivity in the atmosphere;
and jet aircraft pollution of the high troposphere and stratosphere.
The proceedings of this meeting were published by the MIT Press.4' 5
The working group for SCEP was, with one exception, composed of
residents of the United States : scientists, representatives of industrial
management, and government officials. Some of the participants felt
that a more multinational participation would be essential if standard-
ized global programs were to come into existence as a result of such
a meeting. Also, it was the opinion that the problems of climate modi-
fication were complex enough to occupy the entire attention of a work-
ing meeting. As a result, a second such meeting was held, this time in
Stockholm, with scientists from 14 countries participating. This work-
ing meeting was called Study of Man's Impact on Climate1 (SMIC).
The report prepared by this group 6 dealt with the substantive scien-
tific questions of inadvertent climate modification, including: previous
climatic changes; man's activities influencing climate; theory and
models of climatic change; climatic effects of manmade surface
ciianges; modification of the troposphere; 7 and modification of the
stratosphere.8 One objective of SMIC was to provide guidelines for
the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and other interna-
tional agencies to use in establishing monitoring and research pro-
grams on a global scale.
In connection with the study of inadvertent climate modification,
much was iterated in the early 1970's about the need for global moni-
toring. Because of the lagtime in planning, financing, and construct-
ing such facilities (which must necessarily be in wilderness areas in
order to give representative data not reflecting local effects), the
minimum number of benchmark stations (10) considered necessary
has not yet been reached. Five stations are currently in operation.
Mauna Loa Observatory (MLO), the oldest, was established by the
3 Singer, S. F., "Global Effects of Environmental Pollution," New York. Springer-Verlag,
^Wilson Carroll L , editor. Man's Imnact on the Global Environment, Report of the
Study of Critical Environmental Problems (SCEP). Cambridge, MIT Press, 1970, 319 pp.
G Matthews, W. H., W. W. Kellogg, and G. D. Robinson, editors. "Man's Impact on the
Climate." Cambridge, MIT Tress. 1971, r>*)4 pp-
"Wilson C L and W IT Matthews, editors, Inadvertent Climate Modification, Report
of the Study of Man's Impact on Climate (SMIC). Cambridge, the MIT Press, 1971, 30S pp.
7 Troposphere — the inner layer of the atmosphere varying in height from 0 to 12 miles.
This is the region within wMch nearlv all weather conditions manifest themselves.
8 Stratosphere — the region of the atmosphere outside the troposphere, about 10 to 30
miles in height.
151
U.S. Weather Bureau, then transferred to the supervision of the
Atmospheric Physics and Chemistry .Laboratory of the Environ-
mental Science Services Administration in I96ii and finally to the Air
Resources Laboratory of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-
ministration (NOAA) in 1971. In the following year, the NOAA net-
work was officially expanded to four stations: MLO; South Pole;
Point Barrow, Alaska ; and American Samoa. The other operational
station is located at Kislovodsk, North Caucasus, in tne U.S.S.E. The
Government of Canada has plans for three high latitude northern
stations, and some limited monitoring activities are conducted in Aus-
tralia and New Zealand.
In addition to the long-term monitoring program, two shorter
programs have been devoted to the inadvertent modification problem.
The first of these, the Metropolitan Meteorological Experiment
(Metromex), was directed toward a concentrated investigation of
downwind eiiects of the thermal and particulate emissions from a typi-
cal metropolitan area — St. Louis, Mo. The project involved an exam-
ination of all available climatological data in a circle around the
city, plus an extensive field program in which a number of State
and Federal Government agencies and university research groups
participated.
The objective of the second program was to prepare an environmen-
tal impact statement on the effects of supersonic transport aircraft.
The resulting research activity, the Climatic Impact Assessment Pro-
gram (CIAP), involved 9 agencies and departments of the Federal
Government, 7 agencies of other national governments, and over 1,000
individual scientists in the United States and abroad. The program
involved data-collecting activities using aircraft and balloons in the
stratosphere, development of new techniques for sampling and measur-
ing stratospheric pollutants, laboratory work in the photochemistry
of atmospheric trace gases, measurement of pollutant emission by air-
craft engines, mathematical modeling of stratospheric transport proc-
esses and chemical reactions taking place there.9
UNDERSTANDING THE CAUSES OF CLIMATIC CHANGE AND VARIABILITY
It is a human tendency to cling to the belief that the natural environ-
ment or climate to ivhich we have become accustomed will remain more
or less the same from year to year and from decade to decade. We are
surprised and alarmed tohen an unusually severe winter or an unusu-
ally prolonged drought occurs, because our memories tend to be too
short to recall past years when things were equally unusual.
—William W. Kellogg, 1978
National Center for Atmospheric^ Research.
The facts are that climate everywhere does fluctuate quite noticeably
from year to year and that there are gradual changes in climate that
make one decade or one century different from the one before. These
yearly fluctuations and longer term changes have been the result of
natural processes or external influences at work on the complex system
that determines Earth's climate. It is a system that seems to strive for
a balance among atmosphere, oceans, land, and polar ice masses — all
9 Barrett, Earl W., "Inadvertent Weather and Climate Modification." Crtiical Reviews in
Environmental Control, vol. 6, No. 1, December 1975, pp. 15-90.
152
influenced by possible solar and cosmic variations of which climate
researchers' knowledge is in some cases nonexistent, or incomplete, and
otherwise tenuous at best. Society itself is becoming another significant
factor in the climatic balance.
It is no news, for example, that the atmosphere of large midlatitude
cities is both warmer and more turbid than the surrounding country-
side (particularly in winter) as a result of thermal and chemical pol-
lution and to some extent because of the ability of groups of buildings
to trap heat from the Sun. There is also good evidence for increased
summertime rainfall downwind from cities such as St. Louis, Chicago,
and Paris.10 Indeed, it is very likely that the industrialization of siz-
able regions, such as the eastern United States and western Europe,
has modified their climates in certain more subtle ways. In any attempt
to assess a manmade climatic effect, it is essential to understand and
have a measure of the degree of climatic variability which may be
expected in the absence of human influence.
The concept of climatic change and variability
The concept of climatic change and variability entails a wide range
of complex interactions with a disparity of response times among the
air, sea, ice, land, and biotic components of the climate system. Climate
is not a fixed element of the natural environment. Indeed, important
advances in climate research and the study of former climates confirm
that past climates of Earth have changed on virtually all resolvable
time scales. This characteristic suggests that there is no reason to
assume the favorable climatic regime of the last several decades is
permanent and, moreover, that climatic change and variability must
be recognized and dealt with as a fundamental property of climate.
In this matter it is important to appreciate the fact that a renewed
appreciation of the inherent variability of climate has manifested
itself in the public consciousness. Climate has not become suddenly
more variable in a way that it has never been variable before, but events
of recent years 11 have shaken a somewhat false sense of technological
invulnerability. Thus, climatic variability is a media item now because
society ignored for so long its continued dependence on the ecological/
climatic balance achieved, and then failed to plan systematically for
the coming unfavorable years, which eventually had to come — and
always will, given the nature of the atmosphere. It is more palatable
to blame climate for present predicaments than to acquiesce to a lack
of preparedness. As F. Kenneth Hare, climatologist with the Science
Council of Canada, has noted :
It is paramount that the [climate- related] events of 1972 do not repeat them-
selves, even if bad weather does. It does not matter whether such events are part
of a genuine change in climate or are merely unusually large fluctuations of a
basically unchanging system. In fact, I doubt whether such arguments mean any-
thing. It does matter that climatic extremes do occur ; that they have recently
become rather frequent and have had severe impacts ; that we lack the predic-
10 Dettwiller, J. W. and S. A. Changnon, "Possible Urban Effects on Maximum Daily
Rainfall Rates at Paris, St. Louis, and Chicago." Journal of Applied Meteorology, vol. 15,
May 1976. pp. 517-519.
11 Most of the world's important grain-growing regions experienced unfavorable weather
and crop failures in 1972 or 1974. or both. Tbo winter of 1977 was perceived by most Amer-
icans as remarkably abnormal, with severe cold in the East (coldest, in fact, since the
founding of the Republic), drought in the West, and mild temperatures ns far north as
Alaska : and the summer of 1977 was one of the two or three hottest in the last 100 years
over most of the United States.
153
tive skill to avoid impacts on food production — and energy consumption; and
that we [the atmospheric science community] are insufficiently organized to make
maximum use of existing skill.12
While scientists concur that climate is not a fixed component of the
natural environment, there is less agreement with regard to when
and how climatic change occurs. Although in the long term a major
natural change to a different climatic regime may be expected, it is
unlikely that any trend toward such a change would be perceptible in
the near term, as it could be obscured by large amplitude, shorter term
climatic variability. Considered from a historical perspective, and
judging from the record of past interglacial ages, climatic data indi-
cate that the long-term trend over the next 20,000 or so years is toward
a cooling cycle, a cooler climate, and eventually the next glacial age.
The onset of that change may be a number of centuries or millennia
away ; conceivably it may already have begun. In recent years, books
and newspaper stories have conditioned us to expect colder weather in
the future. In geological perspective, the case for cooling is strong.
The modern-day world is experiencing an interglacial period, a rela-
tively warm interlude — lasting many thousands of years — between
longer intervals of cold. If this interglacial age lasts no longer than a
dozen earlier ones in the past million years, as recorded in deep-sea
sediments, we may reasonably suppose that the world is about due to
begin a slide into the next ice age. It does seem probable, though, that
this transition would be sufficiently gradual so that in the next 100 to
200 years it would be almost imperceptible amid the ubiquitous varia-
bility of climate.13, 14> 15
Considering the much more recent past, climatologists point out
that the world has been in the throes of a general cooling trend during
the last SO or 40. years. Because this modern-day cooling trend has
sometimes been misinterpreted as an early sign of the approach of an
ice age (it really is only one of many irregular ups and downs of
climate that mankind has witnessed through Jiistory ) , it has reenf orced
the popular notion that our future is likely to be a cold one. (In point
of fact, this cooling trend has been faltering in very recent years, and
may already have started to reverse itself.)
Writes research climatologist J. Murray Mitchell, Jr. :
I agree with those climatologists who say that another ice age is inevitable.
I strongly disagree, however, with those who suggest that the arrival of the next
ice age is imminent, and who speak of this as the proper concern of modern
civilization in planning for the next few decades or centuries. Should nature be
left to her own devices, without interference from man, I feel confident in pre-
dicting that future climate would alternately warm and cool many times before
shifting with any real authority toward the next ice age. It would be these
alternate warmings and coolings, together with more of the same ubiquitous,
year-to-year variability of climate that has always been with us, that would be
the appropriate object of our concerns about climate in the foreseeable future.16
12Norwine, Jim, "A Question of Climate," Environment, vol. 19, No. 8, November 1977,
p. 12.
13 National Research Council, U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research Pro-
gram, Understanding Climntic Change : A Program for Action, Washington, National
Academy of.Sciences. 1975, 239 pp.
14 U.S. Federal Council for Science and Technology Interdepartmental Committee for
Atmospheric Sciences, report of the Ad Hoc Panel on the Present Interglacial, Washington,
National Science Foundation. 1974. 22 pp. (ICAS lSb-FY75).
15 United Nations. World Meteorological Organizations (WMO). WMO Statement on Cli-
matic Chance, pt. B : technical report, p 9.
19 Mitchell J. Murray. Jr.. "Carbon Dioxide and Future Climate," EDS [Environmental
Data Service] magazine, March 1977, p. 4.
154
Because of man's presence on the Earth, however, what will actually
happen in future decades and centuries may well follow a different
scenario ; imperceptibly different at first, but significantly so later on,
covering a full spectrum of climatic possibilities ranging from warm-
ing to cooling trends. Varying interpretations of this evidence have
led, on one hand, to a scientifically valid caution regarding possible
instability of present-day climate conditions and, on the other hand, to
predictions that the Earth may be on the verge of a new climate regime,
which implies a new equilibrium among the elements of the climatic
system, involving a somewhat different set of constraints and, almost
certainly, noticeable regional shifts of climate. Climate researchers
iteratively emphasize the importance of recognizing and appreciating
the inherent variability of climate, a fact which may be more signifi-
cant than the uncertainty of whether recent events portend a trend
toward a warmer or cooler climate of the future.
When and how do climatic changes occur?
So far, there is no single comprehensive theory, or even a combina-
tion of a small number of theories, that completely explains — much less
predicts — climatic fluctuations or change. As yet, there is no deter-
ministic, predictive model of our planet's climate, and, until one is
developed, predictions are as valid as the logic producing them. The
periods of time involved in climatic predictions cover centuries, and
the validity of climate forecasting is not easily tested. Nevertheless,
there are some factors and processes that clearly should be taken into
account, either in terms of observed correlations in the past or of
theoretical assumptions about what should be important. All, in one
way or another, effect changes and variability of climate by modifying
the natural thermal balance of the atmosphere.
One group of processes responsible for climatic change and varia-
bility consists of external mechanisms, including: fluctuations of the
Sun's radiative output, variations of Earth's orbital parameters,
changes in atmospheric dust content, changes in levels of carbon diox-
ide and ozone in the atmosphere, and migration of land masses and
shifting of continental plates.
In addition to being influenced by external forcing mechanisms,
climate is, to a certain degree, regulated by processes internal to the
climatic system, involving "feedback" interactions between the at-
mosphere, the world ocean, the ice masses, the land surface, and the
biosphere. If an external variable were to be changed by a certain fac-
tor, the response of the climatic system to that change could be modi-
fied by the actions of these internal processes which act as feedbacks
on the climatic system modifying its evolution. There are some feed-
backs which are stabilizing, and some which are destabilizing; that is,
they may intensify deviations.
In all likelihood, climatic change is a function of various combina-
tions of interacting physical factors, external processes, internal proc-
esses, and synergistic associations (see fig. 2), but it is not yet clear to
what extent the observed variability of the climatic system originates
from internal mechanisms, and to what extent from external mecha-
nisms. It appears likely that the answer depends upon the time scale
of variability, with internal processes probably important on the scale
of months and decades, and external mechanisms becoming increas-
ingly important on time scale's beyond a cent ury as depicted in figure 3.
155
Changes of
Solar Radiation
I
ATMOSPHERE
terrestrial
radiation
H,0, NJ( Oj, COJ( 03, etc.
Aerosol
precipitation
atmosphere-land coupling atmosphere-ice coupling
1j BIOMASS
changes of
atmospheric composition
changes of land features,
orography, vegetation,
albedo, etc.
Figure 2. — Schematic illustration of the components of the coupled atmosphere-
ocean-ice-land surface-biota climatic system. The full arrows are ex-
amples of external mechanisms, and the open arrows are examples of
internal mechanisms of climatic change.
Source: Living With Climatic Change. Proceedings of a conference/workshop held in
Toronto, November 17-22, 1975. Ottawa, Science Council of Canada, 1976, p. 85.
SoUr Variability
Earth's Rotation,
Polar Wandering
LIMIT
OF LOCAL
WEATHER
PREDICTION
Continental Drift
Sea-Floor Spreading
-* — Mountain Building
Atmospheric Mass, Composition, Volcanic Dust
Earth's
♦ Orbital »-
Parameters
Mountain
" Glaciers
Continental Ice Sheets
Sea Ice
Snow
Cover
Sea-level, Lake Level, Isostatic Adjustment
Oceanic Composition,
Sedimentation
AGE OF
EARTH
MAJOR
GLACIAL
INTERVAL
Ocean
-* Bottom —
Water
DOMINANT ^
PLEISTOCENE
GLACIAL — Vegetal Cover
INTERVAL
Surface
Ocean Layer
Man's Land Use
-Pollutants, CO,
Autovariation of
"Ocean-Atmosphere
Autovariation
of Atmosphere
I I
10*
10*
107
10*
10* 10* 10*
Time in years
103
10'
Figure 3.— Characteristic climatic events and processes in the atmosphere, hydro-
sphere, cryosphere. lithosphere, and biosphere and possible causative factors or
global climatic change.
Source : National Research Council. U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research
Program. Understanding Climatic Change : A Program for Action. Washington, National
Academy of Sciences, 1975, p. 22.
156
For a comprehensive and detailed discussion of the mechanisms and
factors governing climatic change and variability, see "A Primer on
Climatic Variation and Change" ( 1976) .17
The possibility also exists that society may be changing the climate
through its own actions by pushing on certain leverage points. Our
presence on Earth cannot be assumed to go unnoticed by the atmos-
phere, and human intervention now presents possibilities that have
never existed in the historic or geologic past. At question is whether
the effects of civilized existence are yet capable of altering Earth's
heat balance and, hence, impacting climate on a global scale to an im-
portant extent. Enormous amounts of gaseous and particulate mate-
rials have been emitted into the atmosphere through the combustion
of fossil fuels (primarily carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and fly ash)
and through the manipulation of land for agriculture and commerce
(primarily windblown dust, and forest and grass fire smoke). To
an increasing extent, waste heat is also entering the atmosphere, both
directly and indirectly (via rivers and estuaries) and in both sensible
and latent form (as, for example, through evaporation in wet cooling
towers). Moreover, large-scale land management programs have been
responsible for significant changes in reflective properties, moisture
holding capacity, and aerodynamic roughness of the surface (pri-
marily through deforestation, water impoundment by manmade lakes,
slash-burn agriculture practices, urbanization, and so forth). In view
of the growth of population, industry, food production, and commerce
in the years and decades ahead, the time is almost certainly not far
off when human effects on large-scale climate would become appreci-
able in relation to natural phenomena leading to changes and vari-
ability of climate.
It does seem likely that industrial man already has started to have
an impact on global climate, although this is difficult to prove by direct
observation, because the impact is not easily recognizable amid the
large natural variability of climate. "If man continues his ever-
growing consumption of energy," contends J. Murray Mitchell, "and
in the process adds further pollution to the global atmosphere, it may
not be very many years or decades before his impact will break through
the 'noise level' in the record of natural climatic variability and
become clearly recognizable." 18 Furthermore, the most significant
impacts that mankind would probably have on the climatic system
are apparently all in the same direction as far as global mean tempera-
tures are concerned and are likely to constitute a warming trend.19
The Facts About Inadvertent Weather and Climate Modification
airborne particulate matter and atmospheric turbidity
Particulate matter in the atmosphere may significantly affect climate
by influencing the Earth's radiation balance (figure 4) and/or cloud
nucleation and precipitation.
17 Justus. John R.. "Mechanisms and Factors Governing Climatic Variation and Change.''
In "A Primer on Climntic Variation and Change," prepared by the Congressional Research
Service, Library of Congress, for the Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere
of the Committee on Science and Technology. U.S. House of Representatives. 94th Cong.,
2d sess. (committee print). Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 197G, pp. 77-127.
18 Mitchell, J. Murrav. Jr.. "Carbon Dioxide and Future Climate," p. 4.
Jt> Kellogg. William W.. "Is Mankind Warming the Earth?" Bulletin of the Atomic Scien-
tists, vol. 34, February 1978, pp. 10-19.
157
Do more particles mean a warming or cooling?
There is a question as to whether more particles mean a warming
or cooling of the lower atmosphere. The general cooling trend of the
last 30 to 40 years (which some experts feel may have bottomed out
and already started to reverse itself) could have been a result of a
reduction of solar radiation reaching the surface of the Earth because
of particulates that have been scattered into the atmosphere by man's
activities, among them : the burning of fossil fuels, mechanized agri-
cultural operations, overgrazing of arid lands, manmade forest fires,
and the slash -burn method of clearing land for crops, which is still
widely employed in the Tropics. But if man started his polluting
processes in the last century, and the decrease of global temperature
were due to alteration in the transparency of the atmosphere, then
why has a decrease in temperature not been observed earlier? It is
possible that instruments were measuring a natural climatic trend
that may have been only somewhat augmented by the byproducts of
resource development, power generation, and industrial activities.
The situation is such that the net effect of a given particle on Earth's
heat balance and hence on climate depends, in large part, upon the
nature (number and size) of the particles, where in the atmosphere
they are found, and how long they remain suspended. Some aerosols,
such as lead from auto exhaust, are rapidly scavenged by precipitation.
Others, mostly organic particles such as pesticides, may remain for
months or years. While short-term aerosols such as lead may affect
weather on a local scale, it is the aerosols that remain and accumulate
in the atmosphere that will have long-term effects on climate.
Figure 4. — The mean annual radiation and heat balance of the atmosphere,
relative to 100 units of incoming solar radiation, based on satellite measure-
ments and conventional observations.
Source : National Research Council. U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research
Program. Understanding Climatic Change : A Program for Action, Washington, National
Academy of Sciences, 1975, p. 18.
34-857 O - 79 - 13
158
Idso and Brazel reporting on their research results in the November
18, 1977 issue of Science magazine found that initial increases in
atmospheric dust concentration tend to warm the Earth's surface.
After a certain critical concentration has been reached, continued dust
buildup reduced this warming effect until, at a second critical dust
concentration, a cooling trend begins. But, they explain, this second
critical dust concentration is so great that any particulate pollution of
the lower atmosphere will have the inexorable tendency to increase
surface temperatures. The authors pointed out that if, and when, man-
generated, industrial pollution of the atmosphere as a source of par-
ticulates ever becomes climatologically significant, the resultant sur-
face temperature trend will definitely be one of warming, not cooling.
Thus, whereas many groups assigned to assess the problem have looked
on this aspect of intensified industrialization as acting as a "brake"
on the warming influence inferred lately of increased carbon dioxide
production,20 just the opposite is actually the case — the two phenomena
could tend to complement each other.21
Sources of atmospheric particulates: natural against manmade
Of course, not all aerosols in the Earth's atmosphere, or even a major
proportion, are attributable to human activity. In fact, dust from vol-
canic eruptions, sea salt from evaporated ocean spray, smoke from
lightning-caused forest fires (see fig. 5), debris from meteors which
burn up in the atmosphere, windblown dust or sandstorms, and organic
compounds emitted by vegetation are much larger sources of atmos-
pheric particulates than human activity. Scientists at Stanford Uni-
versity estimate that natural processes produce about 2,312 million
tons of aerosols a year, which amount to 88.5 percent of the total.
Man and his activities account for only 296 million tons, the remaining
11.5 percent. At present, it is unlikely that man's activities and man-
made aerosols will affect global temperatures. It is important to note,
however, that while aerosols from natural sources are distributed
fairly evenly across the planet, man, in contrast, contributes high con-
centrations mostly from industrial centers. Atmospheric scientists at
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Atmospheric
Physics and Chemistry Laboratory found that the 296 million tons of
manmade aerosols are produced every year on only about 2.5 percent
of the surface of the globe. Within these limited areas, manmade
aerosols account for nearly 84 percent of the total. It follows, then,
that these aerosols may be expected to have noticeable effects on local
weather and urban climates.
20 See, generally, National Research Council. Geophysics Research Board, "Energy and
Climate," Washington, National Academy of Sciences, 1977, 281 pp.
21 Idso, Sherwood B. and Anthony J. Brazel, "Planetary Radiation Balance RB a Function
of Atmospheric Dust : Climatological Consequences," Science, vol. 198, Nov. 18, 1977, pp.
731-733.
159
Figure 5. — Not all aerosols in the Earth's atmosphere are attributable to human
activity. In this Landsat photo, smoke from a fire in the Seney National Forest,
upper peninsula of Michigan, serves as a source of atmospheric particulates.
Note the extent of the dust veil downwind of the source. ( Courtesy of National
Aeronautics and Space Administration. )
Atmospheric processes affected by particles
Everyday, particles of soot, smoke, dust, and chemicals from indus-
trial combustion and other activities are emitted into the urban atmos-
phere. About 80 percent of the solid contaminants are small enough to
remain suspended in the air, sometimes for several days.22 Even though
these tiny particles reflect and scatter sunlight ostensibly keeping its
heat from reaching the ground, they also can act as a lid to prevent
the outflow of heat from the land surface to the atmosphere. In a sense,
this turbidity acts as an insulator. It reduces the amount of sunlight
received at the top of the city in the daytime and cuts down on a source
of heat. However, at night urban aerosol pollutants retard the depar-
ture of radiant energy from the heated city air, encasing the heat in
22 "Do Cities Change the Weather?" Mosaic, vol. 5, summer 1974, pp. 33, 34.
160
the city's closed atmospheric system. Certain aerosols may undergo
chemical change when they combine with water vapor in the presence
of solar radiation. There are many complicated processes that can
generate aerosol gas-to-particle conversions, and the particles can then
grow by surface chemistry and physical accretion.23
Perhaps the most sensitive atmospheric processes which can be
affected by air pollutants are those involved in the development of
clouds and precipitation. The formation and building of clouds over
a city can be influenced by the presence of pollutants acting as nuclei
upon which water vapor condenses and by the hot dry air with which
these aerosols are swept into the base of the clouds (see fig. 6). The
structure of clouds with temperatures below 0° C (defined as cold
clouds) can be modified, and under certain conditions precipitation
from them altered, by particles which are termed ice nuclei.24 The con-
centrations of natural ice nuclei in the air appear to be very low : Only
about one in a billion atmospheric particles which are effective as ice
nuclei at temperatures above about — 15° C have the potential for mod-
ifying the structure of clouds and the development of precipitation.
If the concentration of anthropogenic ice nuclei is about 1 in 100 mil-
lion airborne particles, the result may be an enhancement of precipita-
tion ; however, if the concentration is greatly in excess of 1 in 100 mil-
lion, the result may be a tendency to "overseed" cold clouds and reduce
precipitation. Certain steel mills have been identified as sources of ice
nuclei. Also of concern is the possibility that emissions from automo-
biles may combine with trace chemicals in the atmosphere to produce
ice nuclei.25
23 Hobhs. P. V.. H. Harrison, E. Robinson, "Atmospheric Effects of Pollutants." Science,
vol. 183, Mar. 8, 1974. p. 910.
2i National Research Council. Committee on Atmospheric Sciences. "Weather and Climate
Modification : Problems and Progress," Washington, National Academy of Sciences, 1973,
pp. 41-47.
25 Hobbs, P. V., H. Harrison, E. Robinson, "Atmospheric Effects of Pollutants," p. 910.
161
Figure 6. — The formation and building of clouds can be influenced by the pres-
ence of pollutants acting as nuclei upon which water vapor condenses and by the
hot dry air with which these aerosols are swept aloft. In this Landsat photo,
excess particles as well as heat and moisture produced by the industries of Gary,
Ind.. favor the development of clouds downwind. The body of water shown is
the southern tip of Lake Michigan. (Courtesy of National Aeronautics and
Space Administration.)
Precipitation from clouds that have temperatures above 0° C (warm
clouds) may be modified by particles which serve as cloud condensa-
tion nuclei (CCN). A source that produces comparatively low con-
centrations of very efficient CCN will tend to increase precipitation
from warm clouds, whereas one that produces large concentrations
of somewhat less efficient CCN might decrease precipitation. Modi-
fications in the structure of clouds and precipitation have been observed
162
many miles downwind of fires and pulp and paper mills. Large wood-
waste burners and aluminum smelters have also been identified as
major sources of CCN.26
The La Porte tveather anomaly: urban climate modification
La Porte, Ind., is located east of major steelmills and other indus-
tries south of Chicago. Analysis of La Porte records revealed that,
since 1925, La Porte had shown a precipitation increase of between
30 and 40 percent. Between 1951 and 1965, La Porte had 31 percent
more precipitation, 38 percent more thunderstorms, and 246 percent
more hail days than nearby weather stations in Illinois, Indiana,
and Michigan.27 Reporting on this anomaly at a national meeting of
the American Meteorological Society in 1968, Stanley Changnon, a
climatologist with the Illinois State Water Survey pointed out that
the precipitation increase in La Porte closely followed the upward
curve of iron and steel production at Chicago and Gary, Ind. Fur-
thermore, La Porte's runs of bad weather correlated closely with
periods when Chicago's air pollution was bad. Stated simply, Ohang-
non's theory was that if this effect did not occur by chance, then the
increase in precipitation comd be caused by the excess particles
as well as heat and moisture produced by the industries upwind
of La Porte. Pollutants from the industrial sources, it seemed, were
serving as nuclei to trigger precipitation, just as silver iodide crystals
are used to seed clouds in deliberate efforts of weather modification.28
The discovery of the La Porte anomaly helped usher in considerable
scientific and public concern as to whether cities could measurably
alter precipitation and severe weather in and downwind of them. A
large urban-industrial center is a potential source of many conditions
needed to produce rainfall. These include its release of additional
heat (through combustion and from "storage" in surfaces and build-
ings) which lifts the air ; the mechanical mixing due to the "mountain
effects" of a city existing in flat terrain ; additional moisture released
through cooling towers and other industrial processes ; and the addi-
tion of many small particles (aerosols), which could serve as nuclei
for the formation of cloud droplets and raindrops.
The interest in whether urban emissions into the atmosphere could
trigger changes in weather and climate on a scale much larger than
the city itself led to climatological studies of other cities. Historical
data for 1901-70 from Chicago. St. Louis, Washington, D.C., Cleve-
land, Xew Orleans, Houston, Indianapolis, and Tulsa were studied in
an effort to discern whether cities of other sizes, different industrial
bases, and varying climatic-physiographic areas also experienced rain-
fall changes. The six largest cities — Washington, Houston, New
Orleans, Chicago, Cleveland, and St. Louis — all altered their summer
precipitation in a rather marked fashion: Precipitation increases of
LOto 30 percenl in and downwind of t heir urban locales, plus associated
increases in thunderstorm and hailstorm activity were documented.
16 National Research Council. Committee on Atmospheric Sciences, "Weather and Climate
Modification : Prohlems and Progress." p. 50.
» Lansford. Henry, "We're Changing the Weather hy Accident," Science Digest, vol. 74,
Dec. 1973, p. 21.
M Changnon. S. A., Jr.. "The La Porte Weather Anomaly — Fact or Fiction?" Bulletin of
the American Meterologlcal Society, vol. 49, January 19G8, pp. 4-11.
163
Tulsa and Indianapolis, cities of lower population and lesser physio-
graphic irregularities than the others studied, did not reveal any
precipitation anomalies.29
The key questions that could not be answered conclusively at the
completion of these climatic studies were (1) whether the anomalies
found were real (or adequately measured) ; (2) if real, what was
causing the anomalies; and (3) whether and how extensive the anoma-
lies were around other cities. To this end, a major atmospheric pro-
gram dealing with inadvertent weather modification was initiated
by a group of scientists in 1971. The Metropolitan Meteorological
Experiment (METROMEX) was designed by four research groups
who received support from Federal agencies and one State (Illinois).
St. Louis was chosen as the site of extensive field investigations in this
first major field program aimed at studying the reality and causes of
urban rainfall anomalies suggested in the climatological surveys con-
ducted previously.30
Although data analysis and report preparation continue (summer
1975 was the fifth and final year for field work), METROMEX data
thus far portray statistically significant increases in summer rainfall,
heavy (more than 2.5 cm) rainstorms, thunderstorms and hail in and
just east (downtown) of St. Louis. Examination of the rainfall yield of
individual showers, the spatial distribution of rain developments, and
areal distribution of afternoon rain clearly point to the urban-indus-
trial complex as the site for the favored initiation of the rain process
under certain conditions.31
Writes climatologist Stanley Changnon :
The greater frequency of rain initiations over the urban and industrial areas
appears to be tied to three urban-related factors including thermodynamic
effects leading to more clouds and greater in-cloud instability, mechanical and
thermodynamic effects that produce confluence zones where clouds initiate, and
enhancement of the [raindrop] coalescence process due to giant nuclei. Case
studies reveal that once additional [rainstorm] cells are produced, nature, cou-
pled with the increased likelihood for merger with more storms per unit area,
takes over and produces heavier rainfalls. Hence the city is a focal point for
both rain initiation and rain enhancement under conditions when rain is likely.31
Recapitulating, METROMEX researchers have found that rain,
thunderstorms and hail can actually maximize within cities and nearby
areas, particularly in those downwind. Such locations may have more
storms, and they are more intense, last longer and produce more rain
and hail than storms in surrounding regions. Apparently, air heated
and polluted by a city can move up through the atmosphere high
enough to affect clouds. This urban-modified air clearly adds to the
strength of convective storms and increases the severity of precipita-
tion. Urban climatic alterations are summarized in table 1.
29 Huff, F. A. and S. A. Changnon, Jr., "Precipitation Modification by Major Urban Areas,"
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol. "54, December 1973, pp. 1220-1232.
30 Changnon. S. A., F. A. Huff, and R. G. Semonin, "Metromex : An Investigation of
Inadvertent Weather Modification," Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol.
52, October 1971, pp. 958-967.
si "METROMEX Update," Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol. 57, March
1976, pp. 304-308.
32 Changnon, S. A., R. G. Semonin and F. A. Huff, "A Hypothesis for Urban Rainfall
Anomalies," Journal of Applied Meteorology, vol. 15, June 1976, pp. 544-560.
164
Table 1. — Some urban climatic alterations 1
Comparison with rural environs
Radiation :
Global 10 to 20 percent less.
Ultraviolet :
Low sun 30 to 50 percent less.
High sun 5 to 10 percent less.
Temperature :
Annual mean 1 to 2° C higher.
Maximum difference 3 to 10° C higher.
Winter minima 1 to 3° C higher.
Cloudiness :
General cloud cover 5 to 10 percent more.
Fog:
Winter 100 percent more.
Summer 20 to 30 percent more.
Precipitation :
Totals :
Summer 10 percent more.
Winter 5 percent more.
Relative humidity : Annual mean 4 to 6 percent less.
Evapotranspiration : Total amount 30 to 60 percent less.
Dew : Amounts 50 to 80 percent less.
Wind speed : < 3 m sec -1 40 percent less.
Speeds :
3 — 6 m sec 20 percent less.
> 6 m sec 10 percent less.
Thunderstorms : Number of days 5 to 10 percent more.
1 After Helmut Landsberg, University of Maryland.
CARBON DIOXIDE AND WATER VAPOR
The constituent gases of the atmosphere that are important vari-
ables affecting the distribution of temperature within the atmosphere
are carbon dioxide and water vapor. Capable of absorbing important
quantities of infrared radiation, they both have a role in modifying
the vertical distribution of temperature in the atmosphere by con-
trolling the flux of infrared radiation. The absorption of incoming
solar radiation by these gases is so small that their concentration has
no appreciable effect on the amount of incoming solar radiation reach-
ing the Earth's surface. Carbon dioxide and water vapor are, how-
ever, opaque to major portions of the long- wave radiation emitted by
the Earth's surface. The greater the content of these gases the greater
the opacity of the atmosphere to infrared radiation and the higher its
temperature must be to radiate away the necessary amount of energy
to maintain a radiation balance. It is this absorption of long-wave
radiation emitted by the Earth, with the subsequent reradiation of
additional infrared radiation to the ground and consequent elevation
of air temperatures near the surface that is known as the "greenhouse
effect."
Increases in atmospheric c<trhon diowide concentration: what the
record indicates
Man adds carbon dioxide to the atmosphere through the combustion
of fossil fuels, and this addition is superimposed on the natural ex-
changes between the atmosphere, the biosphere, and the world ocean.
Since the use of energy has increased exponentially since the beginning
165
of industrialization around 1860, it is not surprising that the best
estimate of carbon dioxide production, which results from fossil fuel
combustion and cement manufacture, shows the same exponential
trend (see fig. 7).
The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has in-
creased steadily from a preindustrial value of about 295 parts per
million in 1860 to a current value of 330 parts per million (+ 12
percent). Since the beginning of accurate and regular measurements
in 1958, observed atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations have in-
creased some 5 percent from 315 parts per million to the current yearly
average value of 330 parts per million as indicated in figure 8.
Figure 7. — The annual world production of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels (plus
a small amount from cement manufacture) is plotted since the beginning of
the industrial revolution. Except for brief interruptions during the two world
wars and the Great Depression, the release of fossil carbon has increased at a
rate of 4.3 percent per year. (Data for 1860-1959 from C. D. Keeling, "Indus-
trial Production of Carbon Dioxide from Fossil Fuels and Limestone," Tellus,
vol. 25, 1973, p. 174 ; data for 1960-71 from R. M. Rotty, "Commentary on and
Extension of Calculative Procedure for Carbon Dioxide Production," Tellus,
vol. 25, 1973, p. 508.)
Source : Baes. 'C. F.. et al. "The Global Carbon Dioxide Problem," Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, 1976. (ORNL-5194.)
166
Figure 8. — Monthly average values of the concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere at Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii, are plotted since the beginning
of accurate and regular measurements in 1958. Variations in photosynthesis and
other seasonal effects produce the annual cycle. Mean annual concentrations
are well above the preindustrial level (290-300 ppm), and the secular increase
is quite apparent.
Source: Baes, C. F., et al. "The Global Carbon Dioxide Problem," Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, 1978. (ORNL-5194.)
The seasonal variation of the record of carbon dioxide measurements
made at Mauna Lao is obvious and regular, showing an October mini-
mum with increases in the later autumn and winter months and a maxi-
mum in May. However, of greater importance to possible climatic
changes is the continued year-to-year rise. Both the seasonal variation
and the annual increase have been confirmed by measurements at other
locations around the globe.
Predicting future atmospheric carbon dioxide levels
Projecting the worldwide needs for energy, even with the present
problems, indicates a long-term global growth in the consumption of
fossil fuels and the associated production of carbon dioxide. Insofar as
possible impact on the climate is concerned, it is the amount of carbon
dioxide remaining in the atmosphere that is most important. In addi-
tion to the atmosphere, the ocean and both land and marine biospheres
serve as reservoirs for carbon dioxide. Based on estimates of preindus-
trial levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide of 290-295 parts per million
and the 1958 to present Mauna Loa data, between 58 and 64 percent of
the carbon dioxide produced from burning fossil fuels remains in the
atmosphere. Cumulative production of carbon dioxide is plotted in
figure 9. The upper set of points indicates the increase in the carbon
dioxide fraction of the atmosphere that would have occurred if all car-
167
bon dioxide produced since 1860 from fossil fuels and cement remained
airborne. The lower set of points represents the observed increase based
on an assumed value of 290-295 parts per million in 1860. The differ-
ence between the two sets of points presumably indicates the amount of
carbon dioxide being taken up by the world ocean and possibly the
biosphere and placed in long-term storage. Nearly half of the carbon
dioxide produced from fossil fuels and cement seems to have found its
way into reservoirs other than the atmosphere.
1 r
n r
i ! 1 1 1 i i r
9 S\c9*-
I860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
YEAR
Figure 9. — The cumulative production of carbon dioxide since 1860 is compared
with the observed increase in the mean annual concentration since that time.
The similarity in the rates of increase (about 4 percent per year) produces
strong evidence that these two quantities are related. About 50 percent of the
fossil carbon flux apparently has been balanced, at least since 1958, by a
flow of carbon dioxide to such reservoirs at the world ocean and/or the land
biota (assumed 1860 atmospheric concentration equals 295 ppm) .
Source : Baes. C. F., et al. "The Global Carbon Dioxide Problem," Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, 1976. (ORNL-5194.)
Future levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide will depend primarily
on the rate of consumption of fossil fuel and to a lesser extent on land
use patterns and practices. With brief interruptions for two world
wars and the Great Depression, the production of carbon dioxide from
fossil fuels has increased with an annual rate of 4.3 percent.33 If the use
of fossil fuels continues to grow at this present rate, the total carbon
dioxide injected into the atmosphere by man since 1860 wouM reach
300 parts per million by the year 2030, and the total concentration
would be equal to 595 parts per million. This assumes, of course, no
change in the average uptake by other reservoirs during this time.
Those energy scenarios that rely heavily on coal, especially for syn-
thetic oil and gas, yield estimated carbon dioxide concentrations of
33 4.3 percent per year provides an excellent fit to the data in figure 7.
168
600 parts per million about the year 2015 and 1,400 parts per miUion
about 100 years from now. Rotty and Weinberg (1977) discuss a
scenario by Niehaus in which nonfossil energy sources dominate soon
after 2000. Even in this case the annual emission of carbon dioxide
from fossil fuel peaks at about twice the present level in the year 2000
and tapers off thereafter; the atmospheric concentration nevertheless
reaches 475 parts per million by 2050. 34' 35> 36> 37> 38
Sources and sinks for carbon dioxide
These extrapolations are based on certain assumptions, a critical
one being that the ocean and the biosphere will continue to absorb a
large fraction of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Some ocean-
ographers see increasing evidence that the upper mixed layer of the
ocean, where most of the carbon dioxide is stored, is rapidly becoming
saturated, and if this were true, then it tends to reenforce the attain-
ment of relatively. high atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations in
the next century. However, this prediction is far from certain, because
carbon dioxide absorption in the ocean could turn out to be greater than
expected because of mixing between ocean layers or other factors.39
The problem is further complicated by a series of current appraisals
that suggest that the terrestrial biomass appears to be a net source of
carbon dioxide for the atmosphere. George M. Woodwell of the Marine
Biological Laboratory at Woods Hole, Mass., explains :
Over the past seven years several reviews of the world carbon budget have con-
firmed that there is an annual increase in the carbon dioxide content of [the
atmosphere] that is worldwide and is almost certainly man-caused. The source
of the carbon dioxide that is accumulating in the atmosphere has been commonly
assumed to be the combustion of fossil fuels. Because the amount of carbon diox-
ide accumulating in the atmosphere is * * * [about] half the total released from
fossil fuels, other sinks for carbon dioxide have been sought. The major sink is the
ocean, but mixing rates appear to be too low for the oceans to accommodate all
the carbon dioxide that is thought to be released in excess of that accumulating in
the atmosphere. The question of whether the terrestrial biota could be another
sjnk was raised in 1970 [at SCEP], and the assumption was made that the biota
might be a sink, especially in view of the stimulation of photosynthesis under
greenhouse conditions by enhanced concentrations of carbon dioxide. More re-
cently, the assumption that increased carbon dioxide in air stimulates photo-
synthesis worldwide has been questioned. So has the assumption that the biota
is a net global sink for carbon dioxide. A series of current appraisals suggests
that, quite contrary to the previous estimates, the biota is probably an addi-
tional source of carbon dioxide * * * as large as or larger than the fossil fuel
source.40
Thus, the great puzzle is the basic stability of the global carbon
budget. Without better information on the behavior of the terrestrial
biosphere, it is difficult to say whether the biosphere is a sink or a
net source of carbon dioxide. If the biosphere is supplying more carbon
34 Baes, C. F.. Jr.. et al. "The Global Cnrbon Dioxide Problem," Oak Ridge, Tenn., Oak
Ridge National Laboratory. 1970. 78 pp. (ORNL 5194. )
* Lenkowski, Wil. "Carbon Dioxide: A Problem of Producing Usable Data." Chemical
and Engineering News. vol. 55, Oct. 17, 1977 : pp. 26-30.
;!0 Rotty, Ralph M.. "Energy and the Climate." Institute for Enerprv Analysis, Oak Ridge,
Oak Ridge Associated Universities. 1970. 28 pp. ( ORAU/IEA (M) 75-3.)
37 Rottv. R. M. and A. M. Weinberg. "How Long is Coal's Future," Climatic Change, vol. 1,
No. 1. March 1977 : op. 45-57.
3* Rottv. Ralph M.. "The Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Consequences of Heavy Dependence
on Coal." Institute for Energy Analysis, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, occasional
paper. 32 pp.. Nov. 14, 1977.
39 Anthes. Ricbard A.. Hans A. Panofskv. John J. Cnbir and Albert Rango, "The Atmos-
phere." Columbus. Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., 197r>, p. 204.
in YVoo''" eii (i. M.. ef al., "The Biota and the World Carbon Budget." Science, vol. 199,
Jan. 13, 1978. pp. 141-146.
169
dioxide than it is absorbing, then the behavior of the ocean must be
different from what oceanographers believe, in the sense that it would
be an even more effective sink for carbon dioxide than previously sur-
mised. Thus, there is a need for intense examination of the flux of
carbon into the ocean. The ability of the world ocean to act as a carbon
dioxide sink is large, but the rate of possible sequestering of carbon is
the important factor. One possibility is that biotic mechanisms in the
ocean are more effective than has been assumed in transferring fixed
carbon from the mixed (near-surface) Jayers of the ocean into deep
ocean waters. Before an estimate can be made with confidence of what
fraction of the carbon dioxide from fossil fuels remains in the atmos-
phere, a better understanding of the roles of both the biosphere and
the world ocean in the carbon cycle is necessary.41, 42- 43
Atmospheric effects of increased carbon dioxide levels
A change in the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere upsets
the Earth's radiation balance by holding back departing infrared light.
All things being equal, if no other change were to occur in the system,
the net amount of energy accumulated by the Earth would raise its
surface temperature until the enhanced infrared emission reestab-
lished balance between incoming and outgoing radiation. The problem,
however, is greatly complicated by the fact that other changes would
certainly take place. For example, if the Earth's temperature rises,
the water vapor content of the atmosphere is likely to rise. More water
will have the same effect as more carbon dioxide creating positive feed-
back in the system and hence forcing temperatures to climb even higher.
A rise in water vapor would quite likely increase the fraction of the
globe covered by clouds. Such an increase would cause the amount of
primary solar radiation absorbed by the Earth to fall. Some combina-
tion of increased temperature and cloudiness will balance the enhanced
absorption of infrared radiation by the added carbon dioxide and
water vapor.
Implications of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations
The possibilities and implications of a continued rise in the atmos-
pheric carbon dioxide concentration were reviewed in a special report
entitled ''Energy and Climate.*' released by the National Kesearch
Council (NRC) on July 25, 1977.44
The most complete, though still imperfect, climate models suggest
that a doubling of the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,
relative to its present amount, would increase the average annual
temperature of the lower atmosphere at middle latitudes by about 2.4°
to 2.9° C (4.3° to 5.2° F), depending on which model is used to derive
the estimated temperature change.
Based on one climate model in which the hydrologic cycle is modeled
in detail along with other aspects of climate behavior, a doubling of
carbon dioxide has been calculated to result in about a 7 percent increase
41Bolin, Bert. "Changes of Land Biota and Their Importance for the Carbon Cycle ; The
Increase of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Mav Partlv Be Due to the Expansion of Forestry
and Agriculture." Science, vol. 196, May 6. 1977. pp. 613-615.
"2 Siegreuthalpr. U and H. Oeschsrpr. "Predicting Future Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
Levels." Science, vol. 199, Jan. 27, 1978, pp. 388-395.
43WooriwHl. Geo-cre M., "The Carbon Dioxide Question," Scientific American, vol. 238,
Janvary 1978. pp. 34-43.
44 National Research Council. Geophysics Research Board, "Energy and Climate," Wash-
ington, National Academy of Sciences, 1977, 281 pp.
170
in global average precipitation. Most of this increase would be con-
centrated in higher latitudes. A general retreat of snow and sea ice
cover, by perhaps as much as 10 degrees of latitude, could result in
the Arctic regions. The extent of such changes in the Antarctic, how-
ever, has not been determined. The temperature rise is greater by a
factor of three or four in polar regions than the average temperature
change for the world as a whole. For each further doubling of carbon
dioxide, an additional 3° C increase in air temperature is inferred. This
would mean that should the carbon dioxide concentration approach
four to eight times preindustrial levels, and increase in global mean air
temperature of more than 6° C (11° F) could be realized — at which
time Earth would be experiencing temperatures warmer than those at
any time in the last million years.45
Implications of a climatic warming
The implications for man-induced climatic warming are particularly
far-reaching for agriculture, according to the NRC report. The global
picture presented by the report is one dominated by the f orementioned
gradual increase in mean air temperatures, with a concomitant shift-
ing of agricultural zones, altered rainfall patterns and other major
changes. Worldwide average annual precipitation could increase,
which, at first glance, would seem to benefit agriculture. The accom-
panying higher air temperature, however, would raise the rate of
evapotranspiration from cultivated lands, and part of the benefits
from the additional water supply could be lost. In some regions,
evapotranspiration might exceed the increase in precipitation; in
others, the reverse might be true. At higher latitudes, there would be
a longer frostf ree growing season than at present, and the boundaries
of cultivation could be extended northward in the Northern Hemi-
sphere. Attendantly, summer temperatures might become too high for
full production of middle-latitude crops such as corn and soy beans
grown in Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri, and it might be
necessary to shift the Corn Belt toward the north where less produc-
tive soils are encountered. Generally speaking, warmer temperatures
would result in a poleward movement of agroclimatic zones. As the
authors of the NRC report state :
The most serious effects on agriculture would arise not from changes in global
average conditions but from shifts in the location of climatic regions and changes
in the relationships of temperature, evapotranspiration, water supply, cloudi-
ness, and radiation balance within regions. Present cropping patterns, crop vari-
eties, and farming technology in different climatic regions are based on cumula-
tive experience over many years in the selection of appropriate crop species and
varieties for each region and in adapting both the plants and their physical
environment to each other in as nearly an optimal fashion as possible. These
adaptations have remained fairly satisfactory over the relatively nam nge
of climatic changes that have occurred in the historic past. But large el in
climatic relationships within regions such as might be brought abo a
doubling or quadrupling of atmospheric carbon dioxide would almost c _ily
exceed the adaptive capacity of crop varieties grown at present.46
The potential global warming trend associated with increasing con-
centrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide could increase desertifica-
tion,47 although there is not conclusive evidence for this possibility.
*Mbid., pp. 4, 5.
47 The awkward word "desertification" often refers to the process by which existing deserts
spread but the term also may refer to the creation of desertlike conditions such as those
which developed during the 1930's dust-bowl years in the North American Great Plains.
171
The altered pattern of rainfall and temperature resulting from the
release of carbon dioxide could change desert conditions in unexpected
ways and even increase agricultural potential in some cases. Authors
of the NRC report concede the present state of ignorance on the
subject :
The most serious effects of possible future climatic changes could be felt along
the boundaries of the arid and semiarid regions in both hemispheres. We need to
be able to estimate whether these belts of aridity and semiaridity will move
toward or away from the poles and whether they will expand or contract in
area.48
The effect of manmade or of natural climatic alteration of desert-
areas is not clear. The advancement of desert conditions into agri-
cultural areas in Africa and elsewhere has been documented during
the past decade, and although rainfall patterns with associated wet
and dry climates are controlled mainly by the general atmospheric
circulation, human activities can have a marked effect on local desert
conditions, even possibly intensifying the process of desertification and
thereby compounding the problem. In particular, excessive ploughing
of dry land or overenthusiastic introduction of livestock and expan-
sion of cultivated areas, during wet periods, into marginal lands causes
destruction of soil-protecting vegetation. During ensuing dry periods,
these marginal lands, with their natural protective cover destroyed by
cultivation and overgrazing, suffer loss of, or a decline in, the quality
of soil. As this occurs over a large region, the bare dry ground, its
reflectivity altered, now acts to intensify the natural climatic condi-
tions which sustain the desert.49
Carbon dioxide and future climate: the real climate versus "model
climate''''
In the final analysis, it is well to remember that it cannot be asserted
that a doubling of carbon dioxide in the real world would have the
same effects on real climate as a simulated doubling of carbon dioxide
in climate models would have on "model climate." This caveat is in
order because no climate model is altogether realistic in its description
of the real climatic system, and because some of the physical processes
that operate in the real climatic system cannot yet be simulated at all
in climate models. Comments J. Murray Mitchell, Jr. :
No climate model on which the above conclusions [regarding climatic warm-
ing] are based is capable of developing its own cloud systems in a realistic
way : most models must be instructed before hand where the clouds are assumed
to exist, and the clouds remain there unchanged throughout the computer
experiment using the model. We should be wary of this, because if the cloudi-
ness were to change in the real world along with a carbon dioxide change,
then the role of clouds in affecting the temperature of the Earth might sig-
nificantly alter the net temperature effect of the carbon dioxide change as
inferred from models that assume fixed cloudiness.50
the model is allowed to adjust cloudiness along with other weather
variables as the calculation proceeds. Early indications are that
Some preliminary model experiments have been attempted at the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Geo-
physical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, N.J., in which
48 National Research Council, Geophysics Research Board, op. cit., p. 14.
48 Ibid.
50 Mitchell, J. Murray, Jr., "Carbon Dioxide and Future Climate," p. 9.
172
allowance for cloudiness changes does not greatly alter the results of
experiments using models with fixed cloudiness.
Altogether, the experience with climate models suggests that their
use in evaluating the magnitude of temperature changes associated
with changes of atmospheric carbon dioxide leads to results that are
likely to approximate reality fairly closely. Models may be overesti-
mating the temperature and other climatic effects of carbon dioxide
changes by as much as a factor of two. On the other hand, it is
equally likely that they may be underestimating the effects by a
factor of two. In balance, the model results to date warrant being
taken as an unprejudiced and credibly realistic approximation to
reality.51
OZONE DEPLETION
The concern that man's activities could in some fashion change the
stratosphere first emerged as a public issue during the debate on the
American SST in 1969. The American SST program was, at that
time, almost a decade old and was approaching its final phase when
it was challenged by a coalition of more than 30 environmentally
oriented organizations. The environmentalists contended that the
SST, flying in the stratosphere, would contaminate the stratosphere
and alter its characteristics. The dominant concern was that water,
created as a product of fuel combustion, would interact with the
stratospheric ozone and destroy it.
Concerns regarding ozone destruction
Ozone (03) exists everywhere in the atmosphere and reaches a
maximum concentration at around 80,000 feet. It is created, as well
as destroyed, by the interaction of ultraviolet light from the Sun with
oxygen molecules in the upper atmosphere. Most of the ozone is
created in the Tropics and is dispersed from there toward both poles.
Due to the destructive action of sunlight and to the atmospheric
transport systems, the Tropics, where most of the ozone is made, have
the least dense coverage of ozone. Ozone density increases in the
temperate zones and reaches its maximum density in the polar regions.
Ozone density over a given spot on Earth may vary as much as 25
to 30 percent on a given day and as much as 300 percent throughout
the year depending on the season. Ozone density measurements have
shown that the Northern Hemisphere of the Earth has a slightly
denser coverage than the Southern Hemisphere.
The importance of the ozone content of the upper atmosphere
centers on the fact that the ultraviolet light that creates ozone is
absorbed in the process. These wavelengths of ultraviolet light are
damaging to life of all sorts if the intensity is too great. It should be
noted that some ultraviolet light is required by animal life to produce
vitamin D which gives protection against rickets.
In the debate over the American SST, it became clear that neither
side had enough data on the stratosphere to refute the other. Despite
this, the debate remained lively for more than a year and was finally
terminated by the congressional decision to cancel the SST program
and to initiate programs to study the upper atmosphere and in par-
ticular, its ozone.
51 Information gleaned In a session on "climatic futures" at the 1978 annual meeting of
the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C., Feb. 17,
1978.
173
Congress requested and funded a 3-year, $24 million program, to
determine whether or not the stratospheric flight constituted a threat
to the Earth's environment. Responsibility for the study was given to
the Department of Transportation and was called the "Climatic Im-
pact Assessment Program" (CIAP).52 The theoretical mechanisms
which indicated that water, created from the combustion of fuel, would
mix with and destroy ozone appeared to be reasonable and meritorious
of serious study. Early in the CIAP, however, actual measurements of
ozone density in the stratosphere in volumes of air which were per-
meated by the plume from jet engines, were made. These measurements
showed that ozone density seemed to increase subsequent to the injec-
tion of water vapor. Why this occurs is not yet understood, but the test
provided adequate information to conclude that water vapor injected
into the stratosphere would not constitute a danger to the ozone.
During the conduct of the CIAP program, other papers began to
appear which described a variety of heretofore unconsidered theoreti-
cal ways in which man's activities could adversely effect the ozone
density in the stratosphere. The atmosphere of the Earth is about 80
percent nitrogen and 20 percent oxygen. The oxygen used in the com-
bustion process is therefore accompanied by a large amount of nitro-
gen. The heat of combustion causes the formation of several oxides of
nitrogen (NOx). Theoretical mechanisms were proposed which pre-
dicted that the NOx formed in the stratosphere by a jet engine would
mix with the ozone and destroy it in a catalytic manner. In other
words, during the process in which the NOx would destroy the ozone,
the XOx would be reformed and released to destroy still more ozone
in a continuous manner.53 The mechanisms for this process appeared
reasonable and worthy of serious study. However, Dr. John J.
McKetta of the CEQ noted that the total NOx burden produced by
combustion processes amounts to only about 2 percent of that produced
by dying vegetation in the natural cycle of plant life.54 It was then
noted that the artificial insertion of nitrogen compounds into the soil
for purposes of fertilizing caused the evolution and ultimate release
of XOx in quantities amounting to a sizable fraction of that produced
by nature. 55 • 56
Moreover the bromine compounds used in agriculture as antifungi-
cides were held to be even more potent in destroying ozone than NOx.57
Still more very large sources of NOx were identified, such as lightning
from the some 5.000 storms around the Earth, each day. Also, air
bursts of nuclear bombs produce NOx at the rate of 10,000 tons per
megaton of yield. 58, 59 In the early 1960?s, 340 megatons of explosive
injected about 3% million tons of XOx into the stratosphere.
52 "Climatic Impact Assessment Program Development and Accomplishments, 1971-75,"
J. Mormino, et al., D0T-TST-76-41, December 1975.
53 "Reduction of Stratospheric Ozone by Nitrogen Oxide Catalysts from Supersonic Trans-
port Exhaust," H. Johnston, Science, Aug. 6, 1971.
54 "The Eight Surprises," J. J. McKetta. address to the American Trucking Association,
Oct. 16. 1974. reprinted in the Congressional Record. Mar. 12, 1975.
55 "NOAA Scientist Weighs Possible Fertilizer Effects on Ozone," Paul Crutzen, Depart*
ment of Commerce News, Apr. 15, 1975.
56 "Nitrogen Fertilizer Threatens Ozone," quotes from J. McElroy, Washington Star,
Dec. 12. 1974.
57 "Weather Warfare" (Bromine). New Scientist, Mar. 27, 1975, p. 762.
58 "Ozone Appears Unalterpd by Nitric Oxide," Kenneth J. Stein, Aviation Week and Space
Technology, Nov. 6, 1972. p. 28. • • . ^ ,r ,
. 59 "Nitrogen Oxides, Nuclear Weapon Testing, Concorde and Stratospheric Ozone," P.
Goldsmith, et at, Nature, Aug. 31, 1973, p. 545.
34-857—79 14
174
It had begun to appear to many that, in the Earth's atmosphere,
which' is about 80 percent nitrogen and 20 percent oxygen, the NOx is
ubiquitous and that there was just no legislative way to save the ozone
from the catalytic disintegration hypothesized. The issue endures
largely as an academic debate, though its character could change again.
One group holds that the destructive mechanisms ascribed to NOx are
real and that ozone density is controlled by the presence of NOx- An
opposing group contends that, while the hypothetical reactions appear
to be sound, they just don't seem to occur. The insertion of 3% million
tons of XOx by nuclear explosions over 1 year's time, for example, was
judged by many as an experiment of sufficient magnitude to cause un-
mistakable perturbations in ozone density, and would prove or dis-
prove the destruction hypothesis. Recordings of ozone density before,
during, and following the test were analyzed by numerous people. One
investigator detected trends which he associated with the explosions ;
however, others held that "the conclusion that massive injections of
nitrogen oxides into the stratosphere do not upset the ozone layer seems
inescapable." 60
Putting that aside, yet another challenge to the ozone, the manmade
fluorocarbons (freon aerosol propellants and refrigerants) has been
postulated.61 The hypothetical mechanisms by which these compounds
would migrate into the stratosphere, break down to release odd chlorine
molecules which would in turn set up a catalytic destruction of ozone,
where examined and found to be plausible and a cause for concern. Sub-
sequent measurements taken in the stratosphere proved the presence of
numerous odd chlorine molecules, some of which could indeed be shown
to have their origin in freon.62
Although the empirical validity of the destructive interaction of
these odd chlorines with ozone is difficult to show and has yet to be
shown, their discovery in the stratosphere was enough for several
scientists to call for a ban on the fluorocarbons. Other scientists, as well
as industry, took an opposing view, calling for empirical proof prior to
taking actions to ban or control the manufacture or use of freon
propellants.
The argument became partly one of timing with one side claiming
that no emergency could be proven and plenty of time was available to
test the destruction hypothesis. Opposing this was the view that it may
very well be too late already since most of the freons already released
have yet to reach the stratosphere.
Unlike the case with XOx. where changes as vast as banning the
use of nitrating fertilizers might be required, the control of freon
release was a manageable target for a regulatory control. The resulting
studies and actions represent a model of rapid and cooperative action
between a large number of highly diverse Government offices and
agencies. The decision was made to act without waiting for empiricial
proof of the destruction hypothesis, but not to institute the total and
immediate ban some investigators called for. Instead, propellant ap-
plication would be labeled as possibly hazardous to the ozone and then
"° I '»id.
r; "Stratospheric O^one Destruction hv Man-made Ohlorofluoromethanes," R. J. Cicerone,
et al.. Science, Sept. 27, 1974.
""Atmospheric Halocarbons and Stratospheric Ozone," J. E. Lovelock, Nature, Nov. 22,
1074.
175
i banned in stages. Refrigerants would be studied pending their possible
regulation at some future time.
Action by the Government on the regulation of fluorocarbons
The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the Federal
Council for Science and Technology (FCST) reviewed theoretical
oapers on the destructive interaction between fluorocarbons and ozone,
the first of which appeared in 1974. They decided that the case was
worthy of serious concern. In January 1975, the CEQ and FCST
jointly created a large ad hoc task force known as the Federal Inter-
agency Task Force on Inadvertent Modification of the Stratosphere
(IMOS). IMOS membership included representatives from:
Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS).
Department of Agriculture.
Department of Commerce,
Department of Defense.
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
Food and Drug Administration.
Department of Justice.
Department of State.
Department of Transportation.
Energy Research and Development Administration.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Consumer Products Safety Commission.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
National Science Foundation.
Council on Environmental Quality.
Office of Management and Budget (observer only) .
The work of IMOS was swift and orderly. A series of studies was
completed and published in their report by June 1975.63 IMOS con-
cluded "that fluorocarbons released to the environment are a legitimate
cause for concern." The report also referred to a similar study which
was then underway at the National Academy of Sciences. IMOS rec-
ommended that, should the results of the NAS study agree with their
results, then Federal regulatory agencies should initiate rulemaking
procedures for implementing regulations to restrict fluorocarbon uses.
The data base for the NAS study was of course the same data base
used by IMOS since it was the only one available. The conclusions
reached by both studies were therefore the same, and rulemaking was
instituted.
If the data base could have contained some empirical proof sup-
porting the validity of the massive ozone destruction hypothesis, the
rulemaking procedures would have proceeded without, or at least with
much less debate and protest. As it was, the rules were handed down
without proof, the justification being that the consequences of higher
UV exposure due to ozone thinning were sufficiently severe that pre-
cautionary regulations were necessary. Under these circumstances, the
rules Ave re models of compromise. A ban was to be issued over the pro-
test of industry, but it would neither be the complete ban nor the imme-
diate one demanded by the environmental groups and some scientists.
63 '"Fluorocarbons and the Environment," IMOS. Council on Environmental Quality and
the Federal Council for Science and Technology, June 1975.
176
The proposed rules were formulated jointly by the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, the Environmental Protection
Agency, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission. In brief, they
state :
1. By October 15, 1978, no company may manufacture fluoro-
carbons for use in aerosol products.
2. By December 15, 1978, companies must stop using fluorocar-
bons as propellants in aerosol products.
3. As of April 15, 1979, no spray product containing a fluoro-
carbon propellant may be introduced into interstate commerce.
Products on store shelves at that time may be sold, however, and
there will be no recall.
4. Beginning in October 1978, warning labels will be put on
aerosol products which contain fluorocarbons to warn the user
that the fluorocarbons are present and may affect the ozone.
5. Certain aerosol products intended for medical purposes are
exempt from these regulations.
The rule on labeling has already been put into effect.64
Climatic effects of ozone depletion
While the effect of a significant buildup in the concentration of
chlorofluorocarbons and chlorocarbons on the chemical balance of the
Earth/atmosphere system is currently a subject of concern, their im-
pact and effect on the Earth's overall thermal energy balance must
also be considered. The chlorofluorocarbons and chlorocarbons have
strong infrared absorption bands, thus allowing these compounds to
trap long-wave radiation emitted by the Earth and, in turn, enhance
the atmospheric "greenhouse effect." This enhancement may lead to
an appreciable increase in global surface and atmospheric temperature
if atmospheric concentrations of these compounds reach values of the
order of 2 parts per billion (ppb) ,65
Furthermore, ozone itself is important to the Earth's climate because
it absorbs some quantities of both solar and terrestrial infrared radia-
tion, thereby affecting the enerofv balance of the Earth/atmosphere
system that determines the Earth's temperature. Exactly how changes
in the ozone concentration might affect climate are far more difficult
to determine, since changes in surface temperature from variations in
ozone depend on such diverse factors as whether the total amount of
ozone is increased or decreased, whether the height at which the maxi-
mum amount of ozone occurs is altered, or whether the latitudinal
distribution of ozone is disturbed. James Coakley of the National Cen-
ter for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Boulder, Colo., has found
that a uniform reduction in the total amount of atmospheric ozone
would lead to a cooling of the Earth's surface, but that a decrease in
altitude in the stratosphere where ozone has its maximum concentra-
tion can warm the surface. Similarly, an increase in total amount of
ozouo warms, but an increase in the altitude of maximum ozone con-
centration can cool the climate. If it were known that an atmospheric
« The previous section on the ozone depletion Issue was contributed by George Chatham,
Spprinllst In Aeronautics and Space, Science Policy Research Division, Congressional Re-
peareh Service.
* Rnmanathan. V., "Greenhousp Effect Due to Chlorofluorocarbons: Climatic Implica-
tions" Science, vol. 190, Oct. 3, 1975, pp. 50, 51.
177
pollutant, such as chlorofluorocarbons, acted to reduce the amount of
ozone in the atmosphere, then before one could conclude that this would
lead to a global cooling, it would still also have to be known if the
clilorofluorocarbons moved the altitude of maximum ozone concen-
tration up or down. If the maximum moved up, this would enhance
the cooling effect of a decrease in ozone, but if the maximum moved
down, that situation would oppose the cooling attributable to the
decrease in total ozone. Thus, while it is conceivable that a large change
in ozone could significantly affect climate, it may be seen that the
direction of any potential ozone-climatic effect is difficult to deter-
mine.66
WASTE HEAT
Another man-generated pollutant that could affect the climate is
waste heat generated by combustion, automobiles, home heating, in-
dustrial processes, and power generation — all produce heat that even-
tually is emitted into the atmosphere. In addition to its direct effect
on atmospheric temperature, in specific situations waste heat can en-
hance convection, the vertical motion so important in precipitation
processes.
On a regional scale, thermal effects may become important by the
turn of the century. However, on a global scale, climatic effects of
thermal pollution today and for the near future appear to be insig-
nificant. Some scientists, however, believe this impact may grow with
increased energy production and conversion. Research meteorologist
James T. Peterson of the Environmental Protection Agency states
that a long-term view reveals that continued growth of energy use
could lead to a large-scale climatic change in 100 years or more. Of
particular concern, says Peterson, are present-day nuclear power-
plants, which will produce about 55 percent more waste heat than a
fossil fuel plant for a given amount of electricity generated.67
To better understand the effects of heat releases on weather and
climate, the U.S. Department of Energy is sponsoring a program called
METER, which stands for "meteorological effects of thermal energy
releases." METER program scientists are collecting data from several
powerplant sites around the United States to aid in predicting the
specific environmental effects of releasing large amounts of excess heat
and moisture directly into the atmosphere from powerplant operations
and cooling towers. The amounts of heat and moisture emitted from
the stacks and towers of a large powerplant are small compared with
those released by even a moderate-sized thunderstorm. Cooling tower
plumes are suspected of acting as a triggering mechanism to create
instabilities in the atmosphere, initiating or otherwise modifying
rainfall and disrupting storm patterns. A typical cooling tower will
produce 5,000 megawatts of heat and evaporate 40,000 to 60,000
gallons of water per minute. Even so, a modest thunderstorm will put
out 800 times that much water and 30 times that much heat.68
The urban "heat island"
• On a local scale, the climatic effects of energy use and heat produc-
tion are significant and well documented. Obviously, urban areas are
66 Schneider. Stephen H., "The Genesis Strategy: Climate and Global Survival." New
York. Plenum Press, 1976. p. 183.
67 Peterson, James T., "Energy and the Weather," Environment, vol. 15, October 1973,
PP. 4, 5, 8.
88 "Power Plant May Alter Weather," the Christian Science Monitor, Mar. 13, 1978, p. 19.
178
experiencing thermal effects. The most evident feature of city climate
is its excess warmth, which is commonly referred to as the urban heat
island. Cities are prodigious sources of heat. Factory smokestacks, air-
conditioners and heating systems of offices and homes, vehicle engines
and exhausts — all contribute waste heat to the outside atmosphere',
particularly in winter. Summer temperatures in the city are 0.6° C to
1.1° C higher than in nearby rural areas, and 1.1° C to 2.2° C higher in
winter. Also, the building materials of brick, asphalt, mortar, and
concrete readily absorb and store more heat from the Sun than the soil
and vegetation of a rural area, and give it up more slowly after sun-
down. While rural areas are rapidly cooling after sunset, the building
materials gradually release their stored heat to the urban atmosphere,
tending to keep it warmer than the countryside.
Another factor that retains high temperatures and makes the atmos-
phere dry is the way a city disposes of its rainwater or snow. During
any shower or storm, the water is quickly drained from the roofs by
gutters and drainpipes, and from the sidewalks and streets by gutters
and storm sewers. The winter snows are removed as quickly as possible
by shovels and plows, and often hauled away in trucks. These methods
of removing precipitation not only take away sources of moisture but
also remove the cooling effect of evaporation. In the country, evapora-
tion can cool the area where the rain and melting snow stay on the
surface or seep into the ground. A large fraction of the absorbed heat
energy is used in evapotranspiration as vegetation transpires water
vapor.
An advantage of urban heat emissions is that the}7 decrease the
likelihood of surface-based air temperature inversions (air tempera-
ture increases rather than decreases with height) and increase the
height of the mixed layer near the surface. Inversions inhibit turbu-
lent air motions which diffuse and dilute pollutants. Heat emissions at
the city surface create a relative decrease in temperature with height
which in turn aids the mixing and dispersion of pollutants. Observa-
tions of urban and rural temperature-height profiles have shown this
effect of thermal emissions. Thus, urban pollutants emitted near
ground level, such as carbon monoxide from auto exhaust, will be
diffused through a greater volume of the atmosphere with a consequent
reduction in concentration.
Other major features of urban climates that are related to thermal
pollution include :
A longer frost-free growing season.
Less snowfall because snow melts while falling through the
warmer urban atmosphere and less snow accumulation because
-now melts on contact with warmer urban surfaces.
Lower relative humidity.
Decreased occurrence and density of fog because of the lower
relative humidity, a feature which may be offset by more par-
t Iculate matter which serves as condensation nuclei.
A slight component of the wind direction toward the city cen-
ter as a result of the horizontal temperature contrast.
Apparent enhancement of precipitation downwind of cities, a
phenomenon partially due to increased convection (vertical
motion).
179
ALBEDO
The calbedo is a numerical indication of the percentage of incoming
i>lar radiation that is reflected by the land, ocean, and atmosphere back
into space and, attendantly, how much is absorbed by the climatic sys-
tem. Another important manner for altering the Earth's heat budget,
albedo can be changed by the process of urbanization, agricultural
activities, changes in the character of the land surface, and by in-
creasing or decreasing cloudiness.69
Most clouds are both excellent absorbers of infrared radiation and
rellectors of solar radiation. Therefore, clouds are a major factor in
determining the Earth's energy balance. An increase in clouds could
warm surface temperatures by tending to reduce the flux of long- wave
(that is, infrared) radiation to space, or cool surface temperatures by
reflecting incoming solar radiation back to space. The net effect of
increased cloudiness is to either warm or cool the surface, depending
on cloud type, latitude, and season.70 The effect of cloud condensation
nuclei (CCN) on the formation of fog and clouds could alter the albedo
of a region if the fog or clouds were sufficiently persistent or extensive,
P. V. Hobbs and H. Harrison, both professors of atmospheric science
at the University of Washington, and E. Eobinson of Washington
State Universit3T?s Air Pollution Research Unit, contend that perhaps
the most sensitive atmospheric processes which can be affected by air
pollutants are those involved in the development of clouds and pre-
cipitation.
Apart from effects on precipitation processes, inadvertent modifi-
cation of the microstrncture and distribution of clouds, with attend-
ant consequences for radiative properties, could have profound effects
on atmospheric temperature distributions and global climate.71
Whether a variation in terrain on temperature or other factors would
have a negative or positive feedback interaction with clouds is a
major question in climate theory that will be answered by extensive
analyses of observations and model studies.
The high reflectivity of snow and ice, as compared with water or
land surfaces, provides positive feedback if the average year-round
temperature decreases and the extent of ice and snow coverage in-
creases and reflects more of the incoming sunlight back to space. The
result is to lower the rate of heating still more, particularly in the
regions closest to the poles. Columbia University scientists observed
from a study of satellite photomaps that snow and icepack cover
were more extensive and of longer duration in the early 1970's than
in previous years. The result, they reported, was to increase the
Earth's albedo, reflect more sunlight back into space, and change the
planet's heat balance.72 It was pointed out that normally vegetated
ground reflects about 15 percent to 20 percent of sunlight and a calm
ocean reflects 5 percent to 10 percent, while snow-covered grassland
or pack ice reflects about 80 percent.
88 Otterman. J., "Anthropogenic Impact on the Albedo of the Earth," Climatic Change,
vol. 1, Xo. 2, 1977, pp. 137-155.
70 "Living With Climatic Change," proceedings of a conference/workshop held in Toronto,
Not. 17-22, 1975 ; Ottawa, Science Council of Canada, 1976, p. 88.
71 Hobbs, P. V., H. Harrison, and E. Robinson, "Atmospheric Effects of Pollutants," pp.
910, 911.
72 The atmosphere is principally heated by terrestrial reradiation, thus the reflected
incoming light, escaping back into space instead of being transformed into heat, represents
a deficit in the Earth's energy balance.
180
They also found that snow and ice covered twice as much ground
in October 1972 as in October 1968 and correlated that situation with
a drop in global air temperatures. They warned that the potential
for fast changes of climate evidently does exist and should be kepfe
in mind.73
There's yet another contributor to the planet's albedo : airborne par-
ticles, particularly the extremely fine dust particles that have been
carried too high in the atmosphere to be scavenged and washed out
by precipitation processes. Many of these particles remain aloft for
months or years. Dust of various kinds may initiate short-term cool-
ing trends with characteristic time spans of decades or centuries. This
depends on the optical properties of the particles, which in turn de-
pend on particle composition and size distribution. Furthermore, par-
ticles radiate in the infrared, and therefore can alter the outgoing
long-wave radiation.
Densely populated regions tend to have higher albedos than do
forests or cultivated soils. The deserts of the world have a highei
albedo than, for example, grass-covered fields. Urbanization, agricul-
ture, transportation networks — all act to alter the surface albedo.
While local changes in albedo have been determined, however, the
overall integrated global variation is still unknown. Even local net
effects of surface changes may not be fully understood, since changes
in the nature of a surface are generally accompanied by change in
surface roughness. Surface roughness alterations can affect the man-
ner and rate of heat and momentum exchanges with the atmosphere
through modification of small-scale turbulent processes.74
A factor such as roughness of the ocean should not be overlooked
in ocean/atmosphere exchange mechanisms. Ocean surface pollution
may also figure in the alteration of the albedo as well as the sea surface
characteristics: an oil slick forming a surface film on the sea. for
example.
LARGE-SCALE IRRIGATION"
Beginning in the 1940's, large areas of the Texas Panhandle, western
Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska came under widespread irrigation.
This large-scale irrigation adds more moisture to the air through
evaporation; has made large land surfaces greener (which changes
the albedo) ; and may act to decrease dust in the air. Since the situation
is somewhat analogous to a large-area rain modification project, a
number of studies have been conducted to ascertain if greater rainfall
could occur in the vicinity or downwind of irrigated areas.
Schickedanz (1976) provided strong evidence of irrigation-related
anomalies; specifically, increased rainfall during months when irri-
gation took place in and/or surrounding large irrigated areas of the
Groat Plains.
The percent rain increase associated with the irrigation effect was
found to vary from 14 percent to 26 percent in June, 57 percent to
91 percent in July, 15 percent to 26 percent in August, and 19 percent
73 Kukla, George .T., and Helena J. Kukla, "Increased Surface Albedo in the Northern
Hemisphere," Science, vol. 183, Feb. 22, 1974, pp. 709, 713, 714.
A growing fraction of current evidence seems to suggest, however, that this has not been
the in North America. Analysis of satellite data for the last decade has led scientists
with the National Environmental Satellite Service to conclude that North American anow
cover showed no significant change during the entire period of record. Rather, the North
American total winter snow cover appears to be remarkably similar year to year. Eurasion
snow cover on the other hand was reported to be much more variable.
w National Research Council, Committee on Atmospheric Sciences, "Weather and
Climate Modification : Problems and Progress," p. 156.
181
] to 35 percent during summer depending on the location and size of
the irrigated areas in the States of Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and
Texas.
Acting similarly to the manner in which urban industrial centers
affect weather in and downwind of them, irrigated areas may be said
to be a focal point for both rain initiation and rain enhancement or
redistribution, under conditions when rain is likely.75' 76
Stick! (1975) also found evidence of irrigation-related rainfall
, anomalies in the Columbia Basin of Washington. Explaining that the
increase in rainfall is real, he offered the following explanation :
The moisture added by irrigation is evaporated and must eventually return
I to the Earth's surface as precipitation. The question is where and when? The
[Columbia] basin is nearly surrounded by mountains. The surface layer of air
in the basin will eventually be carried over the mountains [at the eastern margin
of the basin], and if additional moisture has been added to the air * * * air, we
would expect additional precipitation in the foothills. This appears to be what
happens during the two months [of July and August] when additional evapora-
tion is greatest.77
RECAPITULATION*
In review, tables 2, 3, and 4 summarize much of the pertinent infor-
mation presented in the preceding sections. They are, respectively,
"Inadvertent Effects on Ten Weather Phenomena," "Chronic Low-
Level Pollutants : Mankind's Leverage Points on Climate," and "Pos-
sible Causal Factors in Future Climatic Change to the Year 2000 A.D."
TABLE 2. — INADVERTENT EFFECTS ON 10 WEATHER PHENOMENA 1
Importance/signifi-
Certainty of inad- Scale of inadvertent cance of inadvert-
Phenomenon vertent effect effect ent effect
1. Visibility and haze
Certain.
Meso
Major.
Possible
Macro
Moderate.
2. Solar radiation and sunshine
Certain
Meso
Do.
3. Cloudiness
....do
Urban
Do.
Probable
Meso
Do.
4. Precipitation (quantity).
Certain
Urban
Major.
Possible
Meso or macro
Moderate.
Precipitation (quality)..
Certain
Urban
Major.
do
Meso
Unknown.
Possible
Macro
Do.
5. Thunderstorms (hail/heavy rain)
Certain.
Urban
Major.
Possible
Meso
Do.
6. Severe storms (tornados, other)
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown.
7. Temperature
Certain...
Urban
Moderate.
Possible
Populated meso
Minor.
8. Wind/circulation.
Urban
Moderate.
Unlikely
Meso
Unknown.
9. Fog
Urban/micro
Major.
10. Humidity
Moderate.
do
Meso
Do.
i From "Final Report to the National Science Foundation on the Third Inadvertent Weather Modification Workshop,'!
Hartford, Conn., May 23-27, 1977. Hartford. The Center for Environment and Man, Inc., 1977.
Note.— Micro: less than or equal to 1 km; urban: less than or equal to 30 km; meso: 30 to 150 km; macro: greater than
150 km.
75 Schickedanz, Paul T.. The Effect of Irrigation on Precipitation In the Great Plains.
Final report on an investigation of potential alterations in summer rainfall associated
with widespread irrigation in the Great Plains, Urbana, 111., Illinois State Water Survey,
1976. 105 pp.
76 Schickendanz, Paul T., "Extra-Area Effects from Inadvertent Weather Modification."
In preprints of Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification,
Champaign-Urbana, 111., Oct. 10-13, 1977. Boston, American Meteorological Society,
1977, pp. 134-137.
"Stidd, Charles K., "Irrigation Increases Rainfall?" Science, vol. 188, Apr. 18, 1975,
pp. 279-281. In Effect of Large-Scale Irrigation on Climate in the Columbia Basin,
Science, vol. 184, Apr. 12, 1974, pp. 121-127. Fowler and Helvey argue that small scale
site changes may occur, but the widespread climatic effects of irrigation may well be
minimal. Furthermore, they contend that the available precipitation records for the
basin do not verify Stidd's conclusion that precipitation increased because of irrigation.
182
183
184
Tssues in Inadvertent Weather and Climate Modification
climatic barriers to long-term energy growth
Revelle and Suess (1957) stated:
Human beings are now carrying out a large scale geophysical experiment of
a kind that could not have happened in the past nor be repeated in the future.
Within a few centuries we are returning to the atmosphere and ocean the con-
centrated organic carbon stored in the sedimentary rocks over hundreds of mil-
lions of years. This experiment may yield a far-reaching insight into the processes
of determining weather and climate.78
Thus stated is the case for diligent observation of the consequences
of the man-generated flux of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Left
unstated is perhaps the greater need to anticipate the consequences
well enough to keep them within acceptable limits.
Even though carbon dioxide makes up a small fraction (less than
one one-thousandth of the total atmospheric mass) of the gases that
comprise the atmosphere, it is crucial in determining the Earth's
temperature because it traps some of the Earth's heat to produce the
so-called greenhouse effect.
Worldwide industrial civilization may face a major decision over
the next few decades — whether to continue reliance on fossil fuels as
principal sources of energy or to invest the research and engineering
effort, and the capital, that will make it possible to substitute other
energy sources for fossil fuels within the next 50 years. The second
alternative presents many difficulties, but the possible climatic con-
sequences of reliance on fossil fuels for another one or two centuries
may be critical enough as to leave no other choice.
The climatic questions center around the increase in atmospheric
carbon dioxide that might result from continuing and increasing use
of fossil fuels. In 110 years since about 1860 a 12-percen.t increase in
the concentration of carbon dioxide had taken place, but because of
the exponential nature of the consumption of energy and the burning
of fossil fuels the next 10-12 percent increase would take only about
20 years and the next 10-12 percent increase beyond that only about
10 years. By this time the climatic impact of the carbon dioxide should
(according to model calculations) cause a climatic warming of about
1°C (1.8°F). Four questions are crucial :
1. What concentrations of carbon dioxide can be expected in the
atmosphere at different times in the future, for given rates of combus-
tion of fossil fuels ?
2. What climatic changes might result from increased atmospheric
carbon dioxide?
3. What would be the consequences of such climatic changes for
human societies and for the natural environment ?
4. "What, if any, countervailing human actions could diminish the
climatic changes or mitigate their consequences ? 79
Whether such a warming would influence the extent of ice and snow
at the polar caps or influence the level of the world ocean cannot be
■« Rpvelle R. and H. E. Suess, "Carbon Dioxide Exchange Between the Atmosphere
and Ocean,'' and the "Question of an Increase in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide During
the Past Decades," Tellus. vol. 9, No. 1, 1957, p. 18. . „
n National Research Council, Geophysics Research Board, "Energy and Climare, p. 1.
185
said with certainty. Neither can it be said whether such a warming
would push the grain belts of the world poleward by several hundred
kilometers thereby disrupting the present patterns of agriculture.
These are possibilities, but climatic theory is yet too crude to be certain.
The only certain proof that the carbon dioxide-greenhouse theory is
correct will come when the atmosphere itself ''performs the experi-
ment" of proving present estimates too high, or too low. An important
point remains, though, and that is : The uncertainty in present scien-
tific estimates of potential climatic consequences of increased energy
use is not biased toward optimism.80
Carbon dioxide is not the only byproduct of the burning of fossil
fuels. Another form of atmospheric pollution results from the intro-
duction of dust and smoke particles, which, when suspended in air. are
called atmospheric aerosols. The word "aerosols" is a term used to
describe the suspension of any kind of particle in a gas. These particles
can be solid like dust, sand. ice. and soot. Or they can be droplets like
the water particles in clouds and fog or the liquid chemicals that are
dispensed as droplets from aerosol spray cans. The air contains tril-
lions upon trillions of aerosol particles, which, like carbon dioxide,
comprise only a minute fraction of the total atmospheric mass.
Despite their relatively small volume, aerosols can affect the climate,
primarily by absorbing and scattering back to space some of the sun-
light that could have otherwise reached the Eartlrs surface. Industry
is not the only human activity that causes aerosols. They are also pro-
duced in great quantities by a variety of agricultural activities and
practices, and a significant fraction of the particle loading of the
atmosphere is of natural origin.
A consensus among scientists today would not be forthcoming as to
whether an increase in aerosols would result in a cooling of the climat <3
or a warming of the climate, because aerosols will cool the climate if
they are relatively whiter than the surface over which they lie, or,
alternatively, they will warm the Earth if they are relatively darker
than the surface over which they are suspended. The dust that exists in
the atmosphere today is highly nonuniform in both geographic distri-
bution and relative brightness as compared to the underlying surface.
Therefore, one cannot be absolutely certain whether dust contributes
to climatic warming or can be implicated in climatic cooling.sl
THOUGHTS AND REFLECTIONS CAN WE CONTEMPLATE A
FOSSIL-FUEL-FREE WORLD?
Putting together the different parts of the story of climate and
energy, what picture emerges? How seriously do we respond to the
possibility that the present rate of increase of fossil fuel burning is
likely to have noticeable consequences for climate by the end of this
century, but not become a serious problem until well into the next
century? On the longer time scale, the picture that emerges is rather
startling in the words of Dr. Wallace Broecker of the Lamont-Doherty
Geological Observatory, who explains, "Consumption of the bulk of
the world's known fossil fuel reserves would plunge our planet into a
80 Schneider, Stephen H., "Climate Change and the World Predicament." Climatic
Change, vol. 1, No. 1, March 1977, pp. 31-33.
61 Ibid., pp. 34, 35.
186
superinterglacial, the likes of which the world lias not experienced in
the last million years." 82
Admittedly, we are talking here of possibilities, not certainties. The
climatic consequences of massive fossil fuel consumption may be less
severe than assessments project, but they might be more severe. Man-
kind eventually may discover a new energy source that will obviate the
need to use fossil reserves so extensively for that purpose, and yet a
fossil-fuel-free world in the relatively near future is so bizarre an idea
it is hard even to talk about it seriously. Or perhaps technology could
develop a cosmetic, such as the introduction of an artificial dust layer
surrounding the Earth to screen some of the incoming sunlight. This
could tend to offset the warming effect of the added carbon dioxide.
What would happen if society elected to ignore the problem of
carbon dioxide until it manifested itself (perhaps in another 20 years)
in the form of a clear signal that a global warming trend had begun
that was unmistakably attributable to the further accumulation of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? Delaying until then a mandated
action to phase over the principal energy sources from fossil fuels to
other alternative kinds of fuels and taking into account another
several decades for the transition to be completed would put us half-
way into the next century before the problem could be shut off at its
source. But perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the carbon dioxide
problem is that the effects of carbon dioxide would endure for hundreds
of years, even after the abandonment of the fossil fuel economy, because
of the long recovery time associated with the processes that would rid
the atmosphere of excess carbon dioxide and establish an equilibrium
condition.
This carbon dioxide Sword of Damocles, if indeed it exists, implies
development of solar (including wind, ocean, biomass, etc.) fisson,
fusion, and geothermal at a somewhat more rapid pace than is gen-
erally recognized.83
Asserts J. Murray Mitchell, Jr. :
The alternative is clear. Ours is the generation that must come to grips with
the carbon dixoide problem and mount a vigorous research effort to allow us to
understand all of its ramifications for the future. Ours is the generation that may
have to act, and act courageously, to phase out our accustomed reliance on fossil
fuels before we have all the knowledge that we would like to have to feel that
such action is absolutely necessary. * * * We can scarcely afford to leave the
carbon dioxide problem to the next generation.84
RESEARCH NEEDS AND DEFICIENCIES
Despite everything that science has learned about the broad charac-
teristics of climate and climatic history, relatively little is known of
the major processes of climatic change. Lack of knowledge still is a
82 Mitchell, J. Murray^ Jr., "Carbon Dioxide and Future Climate," p. 9.
83 Rotty, R. M. and A. M. Weinherg, "How Long Is Coal's Future," pp. o5-57.
M Mitchell, J. Murray, Jr., "Carbon Dioxide and Future Climate," p. 9.
187
major barrier to accurate forecasting and understanding of potential
inadvertent modification of weather and climate. The atmosphere and
the ocean make up such a complex and rapidly changing system that
even short-range forecasts may often be incorrect. Gathering sufficient
information about global climate is of importance if atmospheric
scientists are to construct the detailed computerized models capable of
rapidly analyzing enormous amounts of data concerning each com-
ponent of the climatic system, which includes not only the atmosphere
but the world ocean, the ice masses, and the exposed land surface.
Observations are essential to the development of an understanding
of climatic change. Without them, theories will remain theories and
models would be of limited usefulness. Observational records need to
be extended in both time and space to facilitate adequate documenta-
tion of the climatic events that have occurred in the past and monitor-
ing of the climatically important physical processes occurring now.
Knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change may be at least as
fragmentary as the state of the data. Not only are the basic scientific
questions largely unanswered, but in many cases not even enough is
known to pose the key questions. What are the most important causes
of natural climatic variation, and which are the most important or
most sensitive of the many processes involved in the interaction of the
air, sea, ice, and land components of the climatic system ? There is no
doubt that the Earth's climates have changed in the past and will likely
change in the future. But will it be possible to recognize the first phases
of a truly significant climatic change when it does occur ?
In a 1975 report, "Understanding Climate Change : A Program for
Action/' the U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research
Program of the Xational Research Council enumerated the principal
approaches to these problems emphasizing the interdependence of the
major components of a climatic research program and posing a number
of key questions. The components included :
Climatic data analysis : What has happened in the past?
Empirical studies : How does the system work?
Monitoring : What is going on now ?
Numerical models: What is shown by climatic simulations?
Theoretical studies : How much do we really understand ?
Climatic impacts : What does it all mean to man ?
Future climates : How and when is the climate going to change ?
The various components of the climatic research program are to a
great extent interdependent : Data are needed to check general circula-
tion models and to calibrate the simpler models ; the models are needed
to test hypotheses and to project future climates : monitoring is needed
to check the projections ; and all are needed to assess the consequences.85
85 National Research Council, U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research
Program. "Understanding Climatic Change : A Program for Action," Washington, National
Acadmy of Sciences, 1975, pp. 5, 6.
188
TABLE 5.— SUMMARY OF CLIMATIC INDEX MONITORING PROGRAM
Effort Frequency
variable or index Method Coverage required • required2
Atmospheric indices:
Solar constant Satellite Global N W
Absorbed radiation, albedo do do P W
Latent heating... ...do do. N W
Surface latent heat flux do World ocean N W
Surface sensible heat flux do Regional N W
Cloudiness do Global P W
Surface wind over ocean Radar scattering World ocean N W
Oceanic indices:
Sea-surface temperature Ships, satellites, buoys... World ocean E W
Surface-layer heat storage XBT, AXBT, buoys Mid-latitude and low- E, N W
latitude oceans.
Heat transport Moored buoys Selected sections N W
Temperature structure .Ships do E S
Surface salinity Ships, buoys. High latitudes E W
Sea level .1 Tide gauges Selected coastal and E W
island sites.
Composition, dissolved gases Conventional sampling. Selected sections E S
Cryospheric indices:
Floating ice extent Satellite Polar seas, lakes E M
Ice-sheet budget parameters do Greenland, Antarctica N Y
Mountain glacier extent do Selected sites E Y
Snow cover. do Continents E M
Surface and hydrologic indices:
River discharge Flow gauges Selected sites E, N W
Soil moisture Satellite Land areas E W
Lake levels Gauges Selected sites E W
Precipitation Satellite, radar, gauges... Global E W
Composition and turbidity indices:
Chemical composition Sampling Selected sites E S
Aerosols and dust Satellite Global. E W
Anthropogenic indices:
Thermal pollution Sampling.. Continents and coasts N W
Air and water pollution do Global.. E W
Land use Satellite Continents E Y
1 N, completely new monitoring effort required; E, expansion of present monitoring efforts required; P, present (or
slightly expanded) monitoring efforts satisfactory but coordination and further analysis required,
a W, weekly (or possibly daily in some cases); M, monthly; S, seasonally; Y, yearly (or possibly decadal in some cases).
Source: Natichal Research Council, U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research Program, "Understanding
Climatic Change: A Program for Action," Washington, National Academy of Sciences, 1975; pp. 78-79.
The Committee on Atmospheric Sciences, also of the National Re-
search Council, stated in a 1973 report entitled "Weather and Climate
Modification : Problems and Progress" that if society is to deal with
long-term problems of inadvertent weather modification and climatic
changes caused by man and his activities, then urgent attention and
action are required at the earliest possible moment. The Committee
outlined several courses of action that should be undertaken, each con-
tributing to a part of the necessary work to be accomplished:
1. A worldwide network of ground-based stations is needed to moni-
tor the properties of the atmosphere with particular attention being
given to those gases and aerosols affecting radiation and heat transfer.
Precipitation collection should be undertaken for the analysis of
atmospheric chemical constituents. Surface monitoring efforts should
also be augmented by airborne monitoring of particles and gases in the
atmosphere. Table 5 summarizes in detail the variables to be moni-
tored, the method of monitoring, coverage, effort required and fre-
quency required.
2. Since influence on climate caused by human factors is a global
matter, internationally cooperative plans should be established that
will provide long-term and uniform monitoring data.
189
3. Continuous monitoring of the Earth by satellites should be devel-
oped to measure not only cloud cover and cloud types but also the ther-
mal characteristics of the atmosphere and the Earth's surface, as well
as related variations in the albedo of the Earth. Satellite measurements
should be complemented by a program of ground-based remote sensing
of the dynamical, chemical, and particulate properties of the
atmosphere.
4. Computer capabilities for simulation of climate and climatic
changes should be fully utilized. Climatic models eventually may prove
to be quite different from the present general circulation models. How-
ever, if we are to reach the capability to assess the consequences of
further human intervention, climatic model development must be
promptly undertaken.86
Many of the efforts envisaged are of an obvious international charac-
ter, and the degree to which they should be regarded as national versus
international activities is not of critical importance. The important
point is, however, that there are international efforts now underway of
drect relevance to the climatic problem.
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the Interna-
tional Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) jointly organized a global
atmospheric research program (GARP) in 1967. GARP goals in-
clude : providing the improved understanding of the global circulation
needed to extend the range and accuracy of weather forecasts; under-
standing the physical basis of climate and climatic fluctuations ; and
providing a firm foundation for the World Weather Watch
(WWW).87
Several GARP regional expirements are planned in order to exam-
ine specific processes. Hie GARP Atlantic Tropical Experiment
(GATE) followed the Barbados Oceanographic and Meteorological
Experiment (BOMEX, 1969) in a succession of experiments designed
to gain increased understanding of the atmosphere and the causes of
climatic variation and change. The primary objective of GATE was
to learn more about the meteorology of the tropical equatorial belt
where vast quantities of heat and moisture, carried upward by orga-
nized convective systems, are transported and redistributed to higher
latitudes, ultimately affecting global atmospheric circulation patterns.
Because the tropics are believed to be a key to these circulation pat-
terns, scientists expect data from GATE to help them better under-
stand the global climate machine. Conducted as scheduled from June 15
to September 30, 1974, GATE had the cooperation of some 72 coun-
tries. In addition to BOMEX and GATE, experiments designed to
contribute to the understanding of specific oceanic-atmospheric proc-
esses in selected regions are : the Air Mass Transformation Experiment
( AMTEX) , the Monsoon Experiment (MONEX) , and the Polar Ex-
periment (POLEX). These regional experiments and the knowledge
gleaned from them will culminate in a truly international global ob-
serving experiment, the First GARP Global Experiment (FGGE)
scheduled for the late 1978-79 timeframe.
86 National Research Council. Committee on Atmospheric Sciences, 'Weather and Climate
Modification : Problems and Progress," pp. 160, 161.
87 WWW is an operational program of member nations of the WMO for making available
the basic meteorological and related environmental information needed by each member
aation to supplement and support Its meteorological services and research.
34-857—79 15
190
The program goals of GARP intersect with the objectives of other
international environmental programs. One such program is the Inter-
governmental Oceanographic Commission Integrated Global Ocean
Station System (IGOSS) being developed jointly with the World
Meteorological Organization to provide more extensive and timely
information for analysis and prediction of the state of the oceans and
for research purposes. This is accomplished through the development
of a comprehensive monitoring system for the total physical ocean-
atmosphere environment. Another is EARTH WATCH, a major com-
ponent of the United Nations Enviornment Program (UNEP) being
developed to monitor and assess the state of the oceans, atmosphere,
land and human health in order that rational decisions can be made
for the management of the environment. EARTHWATCH will also
interact with and depend on the monitoring and research capabilities
of GARP. A key component of the UNEP/EARTHWATCH global
baseline and regional monitoring effort is the Global Environment
Monitoring System, which is designed to measure and monitor
priority pollutants and related factors of the atmospheric environ-
ment, thus permitting quantitative assessment of the global impact
of manmade and natural influences on weather and climate.
The Global Observing System provides worldwide meteorological
and related environment observation data needed by the World
Weather Watch and GARP. The overall system consists of two subsys-
tem? : a space-based satellite subsystem, composed of two types of
satellites, those in polar orbit and those in geostationary orbit; and a
surf ace-based subsystem composed of basic synoptic surface and upper
air networks, other networks of stations on land and sea, and aircraft
meteorological observations.
The U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research Program
believes that these observational programs planned in support of
GARP offer an unparalleled opportunity to observe the global atmos-
phere, and furthermore that every effort should be made to use these
data for climatic purposes as well as for the purposes of weather pre-
diction. The Committee emphasized however, that the climatic system
consists of important nonatmospheric components, including the
world's oceans, ice masses, and land surfaces, together with elements
of the biosphere. While it is not necessary to measure all of these com-
ponents in the same detail with which the atmosphere is observed,
their roles in climatic variation should not be overlooked.88
The Committee's 1975 report, "Understanding Climatic Change:
A Program for Action," further stated that :
The problem of climatic variation differs from that of weather forecasting by
the nature of the data sets required. The primary data needs of weather predic-
tion are accurate and dense synoptic observations of the atmosphere's present
and future states, while the data needed for studies of climatic variation are
longer-term statistics of a much wider variety of variables. When climatic varia-
tions over long time scales are considered, these variables must be supplied from
fields outside of observational meteorology. Thus, an essential characteristic of
climate is its involvement of a wide range of nonatmospheric scientific disciplines,
for example, oceanography, glaciology, hydrology, astronomy, geology, and
paleantology as well as from the biological and social sciences of ecology, geog-
raphy, archaeology, history, economics, and sociology.
88 N'.-itionnl Research Council, U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research
Program, "Understanding Climatic Change: A Program for Action," pp. 105, 106.
191
The types of numerical models needed for climatic research also differ from
those of weather prediction. The atmospheric general circulation models do not
need a time-dependent ocean for weather-forecasting purposes over periods of a
week or two. For climatic change purposes, on the other hand, such numerical
models must include the changes of oceanic heat storage. Such a slowly varying
feature may be regarded as a boundary or external condition for weather predic-
tion but becomes an internal part of the system for climatic variation.89
In view of these characteristics, the Committee suggested that while
the GARP concern with climate was a natural one, the problem of
climate goes much beyond the present basis and emphasis of GARP.
Accordingly, they recommended that the global climate studies that
are under way within GARP be viewed as leading to the organization
of a new and long-term international program devoted specifically to
the study of climate and climatic variation, an international climatic
research program (ICRP).
As viewed by the Committee the main thrust of the international
climatic program would be the collection and analysis of climatic data
during a series of international climatic decades (ICD) designated for
the period 19S0-2000. During this period, the cooperation of all nations
would be sought to participate in an intensive effort to develop and
secure as complete a global climatic data base as possible. The Com-
mittee urged the creation of an international cooperative program for
the monitoring of selected climatic indices and the extraction of his-
torical and proxy climatic data unique to each nation, which would
include, but not be limited to, such indices as glaciers, rain forest pre-
cipitation, lake levels, local desert history, tree rings, and soil records.
This would take the form of an international paleoclimatic data net-
work (IPDX) , as a subprogram of the ICRP.
To promote wider international participation in climatic research,
it was recommended that programs and activities be developed to
encourage international cooperation in climatic research and to facili-
tate the participation of developing nations that do not yet have ade-
quate training or research facilities. Internationally supported re-
gional climatic studies describing and modeling local climatic anom-
alies of special interest were also recommended.90
The Committee stressed the importance of international cooperative
programs to assess the impacts of presently observed climatic changes
on the economies of the world's nations, including the effects on water
supply, food production, and energy utilization, as well as analyses of
the regional impacts of possible future climates.
IMd., p. 106.
00 The World Meteorological Organization headquarters in Geneva is planning a world
conference on climate, tentatively to be held in 1979.
CHAPTER 5
FEDERAL ACTIVITIES IN WEATHER MODIFICATION
(By Robert E. Morrison, Specialist in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research
Division, Congressional Research Service)
Overview of Federal Activities
The Federal Government has been involved for over 30 years in a
number of aspects of weather modification, through activities of both
the Congress and the executive branch. Since 1947, weather modifica-
tion bills pertaining to research support, operations, policy studies,
regulations, liabilities, activity reporting, establishment of panels and
committees, and international concerns have been introduced in the
Congress. There have been hearings on many of these proposed meas-
ures, and oversight hearings have also been conducted on pertinent
ongoing programs. A total of six public laws specifically on weather
modification have been enacted since 1953, while others have included
provisions which in some way are relevant to weather modification.
Resolutions dealing with the use of weather modification technology
as a weapon by U.S. military forces and promotion of a U.N. treaty
prohibiting such activities have been introduced in both houses of the
Congress, and one such resolution was passed by the Senate.
Federal legislation has dealt principally with three aspects of
weather modification — research program authorization and direction,
collection and reporting of weather modification activities, and the
commissioning of major studies on recommended Federal policy and
the status of technology. In addition to providing direction through
authorizing legislation, the Congress has initiated one major Federal
program through an appropriations bill write-in, and this program
has since regularly received support through additional appropria-
tions beyond its recommended OMB funding level.
Identifiable Federal research and operational weather modification
programs can be traced from at least the period of World War II;
however, the research programs of most agencies other than the De-
fense Department were not begun until the 1950's and 1960's. "While
these research and development programs sponsored at various times
by at least eight departments and independent agencies have consti-
tuted its major involvement, the executive branch has also performed
a wide range of other weather modification activities. Such activities
include the conduct of modest operational programs, coordination of
Federal research programs, collection and dissemination of U.S.
weather modification activities, sponsoring of in-depth studies, publi-
cation of a large variety of reports, negotiation for international re-
strictions barring hostile use of weather modification, and cooperation
with other nations in planning of international research projects or
assisting in foreign operational programs. The latter two activities,
(193)
194
both essentially international in scope, are only noted here but are dis-
cussed more fully in the chapter on international aspects.1
While some of the numerous studies on weather modification have
been undertaken at the direction of the Congress, others have been
initiated by one or more Federal agencies or by interagency committees
of the executive branch. Published reports have included those which
present the findings and recommendations of the special studies under-
taken, those which are published periodically by agencies or commit-
tees with regular responsibilities for reporting on Federal programs
or on operational activities, and the many publications on specific re-
search projects which are prepared by the individual agencies or by
contractors and grantees participating in the respective projects. Later
in this chapter some of the Federal reports which fall into the first two
categories are identified under the discussions of major studies, Fed-
eral structure, and coordination of weather modification; reports
from the third category are referenced from time to time throughout
the report. Some of the Federal reports are included in the selected
bibliography in appendix H and many are also listed in the other
major bibliographies which are referenced in that appendix.
Legislative and Congressional Activities
federal legislation on weather modification
Summary
Congressional interest in weather modification has been demon-
strated by the fact that legislation on the subject has been introduced
in nearly every session of Congress since 1947. Nevertheless, in spite of
the apparent interest, a total of six public laws relating specifically and
directly to weather modification have been enacted during this period,
and two of those passed were mere time extensions of specific provisions
in earlier laws.2 Briefly, these laws are :
Public Law 83-256 (67 Stat. 559) of August 13, 1953, to create
an Advisory Committee on Weather Control, to perform a com-
plete study and evaluation of public and private experiments in
weather modification to determine the U.S. role in research, opera-
tions, and regulation ;
Public Law 84-664 (70 Stat. 509) of July 9, 1956, to extend the
authorized life of the Advisory Committee for 2 years through
June 30, 1958 ;
Public Law 85-510 (72 Stat. 353) of July 12, 1958, to authorize
and direct the National Science Foundation to initiate a program
of study, research, and evaluation in the field of weather modifica-
tion and to prepare an annual report to the Congress and the
President on weather modification ;
Public Law 92-205 (85 Stat. 736) of December 18, 1971, to pro-
vide for the reporting of weather modification activities to the
Federal Government through the Secretary of Commerce and for
dissemination of that information by the Secretary of Commerce
from time to time ;
1 See ch. 10.
* Tliese six public laws are reproduced In app. I.
195
Public Law 93-436 (88 Stat. 1212) of October 5, 1974, to extend
appropriation authorization for reporting and disseminating
weather modification activities through the Secretary of Com-
merce, as prescribed by Public Law 92-205, through 1977;
Public Law 94-490 (90 Stat. 2359) of October 13, 1976, to
authorize and direct the Secretary of Commerce to develop a na-
tional policy on weather modification and to extend appropriation
authorization for reporting and disseminating weather modifica-
tion activities, as prescribed by Public Law 92-205, through 1930.
Although not exclusively concerned with weather modification,
another act, Public Law 90^t07 of July 18, 1968, amended the National
Science Foundation Act of 1950. Section 11 of this new act specifically
repealed Public Law 85-510, by which the XSF had been directed to
initiate and support a program of study, research, and evaluation in
weather modification and to report annually on the subject.
Another law of some significance to weather modification, though
much broader in its overall purpose, was the fiscal year 1962 public
works appropriation, Public Law 87-330 (75 Stat. 722) of Septem-
ber 30, 1961. Through a $100,000 write-in to this bill, the Congress
initiated the atmospheric water resources program (Project Sky-
water) , conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation in the Department
of the Interior. Through subsequent public works appropriations the
Congress has continued to provide direction to this program almost
every year since its inception and has provided frequent funding
increases over levels budgeted by the administration.
\The Advisory Committee on Weather Control
Between 1951 and 1953 it was disclosed in congressional hearings on
several bills introduced by both parties that water users (farmers,
ranchers, electric utilities, and municipalities) were spending between
$3 million and $5 million annually on weather modification and that
such activities covered about 10 percent of the country's land area.3 It
was the opinion of the Congress in 1953 that "research and development
in the field of weather modification have attained the stage at which the
application of scientific advances in this field appears to be practical.*'
but also that "the effect of the use of measures for the control of weather
phenomena upon the social, economic, and political structures * * *
and upon national security cannot now be determined. It is a field in
which unknown factors are involved. It is reasonable to anticipate,
however, that modification and control of weather, if effective on a
large scale, would result in vast and far-reaching benefits to agricul-
ture, industry, commerce, and the general welfare and common
defense." 4
Recognizing possible deleterious consequences which might follow
application of weather modification techniques with inadequate safe-
guards or incomplete understanding, and realizing that weather modi-
fication experiments or operations could possibly affect areas extending
across State and national boundaries, the Congress considered that such
activities "are matters of national and international concern" and ac-
cordingly, declared it "to be the policy of the Congress, in order to effect
the maximum benefit which may result from experiments and opera-
a Advisory Committee on Weather Control, final report, Washington, D.C., U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Oflice. Dec. 31, 1957, vol. I, p. 8.
4 Public Law S3-256 (67 Stat. 559), Aug. 13, 1953, statement of purpose and policy.
196
tions designed to modify and control weather, to correlate and evaluate
the information derived from such activity and to cooperate with the
several States and the duly authorized officials thereof with respect to
such activity, all to the end of encouraging intelligent experimentation
and the beneficial development of weather modification and control,
preventing its harmful and indiscriminate exercise, and fostering
sound economic conditions in the public interest." 5
In order to determine the extent to which the United States should be
involved in weather modification research and/or operations and in the
regulation of such activities, the Advisory Committee on Weather Con-
trol was established by Public Law 83-256, approved August 13, 1953,
and was directed by that law to make a complete study and evaluation
of public and private experiments in weather control.
The Committee was to be composed of Government and non-Govern-
ment members in about equal number and, in carrying out its man-
date, was given authority to conduct hearings, to acquire pertinent
information and records from departments and agencies of the execu-
tive branch, and to enlist the services of personnel of any agency of
the Federal Government (with the consent of the agency concerned).6
The Committee was requested to submit from time to time reports on
its findings and recommendations to the President for submission to
the Congress and was directed to submit its final report to the Presi-
dent for transmittal to the Congress by June 30, 1956. 7 It became clear
that the study was of such magnitude that additional time would be
required for its successful completion, and the Committee requested
that its life be extended 2 years, noting that . . it has succeeded in
establishing some positive and important results which justify the
Federal Government continuing its special interest in the field. " 8
Thereupon, the Congress passed Public Law 84-664 (70 Stat. 509)
of July 9, 1956, which extended the date for completion of the report
until June 30, 1958. The final report of the Committee was submitted
to the President on December 31, 1957.9
Direction to the National Science Foundation
The Advisory Committee on Weather Control recognized that the
development of weather modification rested on fundamental knowl-
edge obtainable only through scientific research into processes in the
atmosphere and recommended that an agency, preferably the Na-
tional Science Foundation (XSF), be designated to promote and sup-
port meteorological research in needed fields, to coordinate research
projects, and to constitute a central point for assembly, evaluation,
and dissemination of information.10 Accordingly, when the Congress
enacted Public Law 85-510 of July 10, 1958, which amended the Na-
tional Science Foundation Act of 1950, additional responsibilities
were incorporated, directing the Foundation :
To initiate and support a program of study, research, and evaluation in the
field of weather modification, giving particular attention to areas that have
c Ibid.
• Ibid., sec. 9.
7 Ibid., sec. 10. „ tl y,. _.
s Advisory Committee on Weather Control, first interim report, Washington. D.C., Feb-
ruary 1956, p. ii. _
9 Advisory Committee on Weather Control. "Final Report of the U.S. Advisory Com-
mittee on Weather Control," Washington, DC, U.S. Government Printing Office, March 6,
1958, in two volumes. 32 and 422. pp. (Recommendations of the Committee are found in
tbi< chapter, p. 2''.R. and in chapter G. )
:o Ibid., vol. I, pp. vii-vili.
197
experienced floods, drought, hail, lightning, fog, tornadoes, hurricanes, or other
weather phenomena, and to report annually to the President and the Congress
thereon.11
The In SF was further directed to ". . . consult with meterologists
and scientists in private life and with agencies of Government inter-
ested in, or affected by, experimental research in the field of weather
control." 12 Authority was given to NSF to hold hearings, to require
the keeping of records and furnishing of information on weather
modification research and operations, and to inspect records and
premises as appropriate in order to carry out the responsibilities
assigned.
In effect, the NSF was asigned the "lead agency" role (a term
which was in later years to become the subject of much debate and
discussion) among Federal agencies involved in weather modification.
A decade later, the Foundation was stripped of these specific respon-
sibilities and of this lead agency role when the Congress again
amended the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, by passing
Public Law 90-407 of July 18, 1968. Section 11 of the 1968 law struck
section 14 and paragraph (9), subsection (a), of section 3 from the
National Science Foundation Act, terminating as of September 1, 1968,
the responsibilities spelled out in these sections a decade earlier with
regard to weather modification.
The Senate report which accompanied the bill subsequently enacted
as Public Law 90-407 stated that the NSF was divested of these func-
tions ". . . for a number of reasons :" 13
One [reason] is that the ramifications of weather modification are so broad
as to encompass far more issues than scientific ones. Another is that progress
in this area has reached the point where it requires much developmental work
as well as continued research. The Departments of Commerce and Interior are
assuming much of the responsibility in this area, which the Foundation may con-
tinue to back up with appropriate support for some of the research still needed.
NSF retains ample authority to continue support for the latter . . . and clearly
should do so. The Foundation will in any case continue those research activities
necessary to preserve continuity in the program, pending passage of the weather
modification legislation now pending. In the latter regard, the committee calls
attention to the necessity for legislation to continue elsewhere in the executive
branch the development and reporting activities which NSF will not have author-
ity to support after September 1, 1968.
Although legislation was introduced and considered by the Congress
which would have reassigned this lead agency role to another agency,
no further congressional action was taken on weather modification
until 1971.
Reporting of weather modification activities to the Federal Govern-
ment
Responsibility for maintaining a depository for information on U.S.
weather modification activities and for reporting annually on Federal
programs and the general status of the field rested with the National
Science Foundation for the 10-year period from 1958 through 1968,
after which, as has been noted, these and other functions were sus-
pended by Public Law 90-407.
11 National Science Foundation Act of 1950. as amended by Public Law S5-510 (72 Stat'
358) of July 11. 1958. sec. 3. subsec. fa), par. (9).
12 Ibid., sec. 14.
13 U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, "National Science
Foundation — Functions — Administration." report to accompany H.R. 5404. Washington,
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968. (90th CoDg., 2d sess. Senate Kept. No. 1137.)
198
After a lapse of over 3 years, the Congress passed Public Law 92-
205 (85 Stat. 736) of December 18, 1971, which directed that ". . . no
person may engage or attempt to engage in any weather modification
activity in the United States unless he submits to the Secretary of
Commerce such reports with respect thereto, in such form and con-
taining such information, as the Secretary may by rule prescribe. The
Secretary may require that such reports be submitted to him before,
during, and after such activity or attempt." 14 The act further states
that the Secretary of Commerce is charged with responsibility to
maintain a record of such weather modification activities in the United
States and to publish summaries of the activities "from time to time"
as deemed appropriate, Such information received under the provi-
sions of this law, with certain exceptions, is to be made fully available
to the public.15 Authority was provided to the Secretary to obtain the
required information by rule, subpena, or other means and to inspect
the records and premises of persons conducting weather modification
projects, as necessary, to carry out assigned responsibilities. There is
also provision for levying fines up to $10,000 on any person for non-
compliance with the stipulations of the law requiring the reporting of
weather modification activities. Public Law 92-205 is concerned with
the reporting of weather modification projects, however, not with
their regulation, control, or evaluation.
Within the Commerce Department, the weather modification report-
ing system required by Public Law 92-205 is administered on behalf
of the Secretary by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-
tration (NOAA). Upon subsequent advertisement of Commerce De-
partment rules in the Federal Eegister, the requirement for submitting
information on weather modification projects became effective on
November 1, 1972. Federal agencies were excluded from the require-
ment to submit such information under the act; however, upon mutual
agreement by the agencies to do so, data on Federal projects have also
been collected and disseminated by NO A A as of November 1, 1973.
Appropriations for administering the provisions of Public Law
92-205 were authorized through June 30, 1974, by the original law.
Additional authorizations for appropriations, extending the responsi-
bility of the Secretary of Commerce for reporting procedures, were
approved by the Congress in two subsequent laws. Public Law 93-436
(88 Stat. 1212) of October 5, 1974, extended reporting requirements
through June 30, 1977; while Public Law 94-490 (90 Stat. 2359) of
October 13, 1976, contained among other provisions a similar exten-
sion of these provisions through June 30, 1980. The major thrust of the
latter act, known as the National Weather Modification Policy Act of
1976. is discussed in the next section.
The National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976
After consideration of a number of bills introduced in the 94th
Congress and extensive hearings on weather modification, the Con-
gress passed Public Law 94-490 (90 Stat. 2359) , the National Weather
Modification Policy Act of 1976, which was signed October 13, 1976.
The following particular findings prompted the Congress to take
action :
1. weather-related disasters and hazards, including drought,
hurricanes, tornadoes, hail, lightning, fog, floods, and frost, result
54 Public Law 92-205 (85 Stat. 73G). sec. 2.
« Ibid., sec. 3
199
in substantial human suffering and loss of life, billions of dollars
of annual economic losses to owners of crops and other property,
and substantial loss to the U.S. Treasury ;
2. weather modification technology has significant potential for
preventing, diverting, moderating, or ameliorating the adverse
effects of such disasters and hazards and enhancing crop produc-
tion and the availability of water;
3. the interstate nature of climatic and related phenomena, the
severe economic hardships experienced as the result of occasional
drought and other adverse meteorological conditions, and the ex-
isting role and responsibilities of the Federal Government with
respect to disaster relief, require appropriate Federal action to
prevent or alleviate such disasters and hazards ; and
4. weather modification programs may have long range and
unexpected effects on existing climatic patterns which are not
confined by national boundaries.16
By this act the Congress proposed "* * * to develop a comprehensive
and coordinated national weather modification policy and a national
program of weather modification research and development —
1. to determine the means by which deliberate weather modifica-
tion can be used at the present time to decrease the adverse impact
of weather on agriculture, economic growth, and the general pub-
lic welfare, and to determine the potential for weather modifica-
tion;
2. to conduct research into those scientific areas considered most
likely to lead to practical techniques for drought prevention or
alleviation and other forms of deliberate weather modification;
3. to develop practical methods and devices for weather modifi-
cation ;
4. to make weather modification research findings available to
interested parties ;
5. to assess the economic, social, environmental, and legal im-
pact of an operational weather modification program ;
6. to develop both national and international mechanisms de-
signed to minimize conflicts which may arise with respect to the
peaceful uses of weather modification ; and
7. to integrate the results of existing experience and studies in
weather modification activities into model codes and agreements
for regulation of domestic and international weather modification
activities." 17
The act charges the Secretary of Commerce with responsibility for
conducting "a comprehensive investigation and study of the state of
scientific knowledge concerning weather modification, the present
state of development of weather modification technology, the problems
impeding effective implementation of weather modification tech-
nology, and other related matters. Such study shall include —
(1) A review and analysis of the present and past research
efforts to establish practical weather modification technology,
particularly as it relates to reducing loss of life and crop and prop-
erty destruction ;
(2) A review and analysis of research needs in weather modifi-
cation to establish areas in which more research could be expected
16 Public Law 94-490 (90 Stat. 2359), sec. 2, declaration of policy.
« Ibid. _
200
to, yield the greatest return in terms of practical weather modifi-
cation technology ;
(3) A review and analysis of existing studies to establish the
probable economic importance to the United States in terms of
agricultural production, energy, and related economic factors
if the present weather modification technology were to be effec-
tively implemented ;
(4) An assessment of the legal, social, and ecological implica-
tions of expanded and effective research and operational weather
modification projects ;
(5) Formation of one or more options for a model regulatory
code for domestic weather modification activities, such code to be
based on a review and analysis of experience and studies in this
area, and to be adaptable to State and national needs ;
(6) Recommendations concerning legislation desirable at all
levels of government to implement a national weather modifica-
tion policy and program ;
(7) A review of the international importance and implications
of weather modification activities by the United States ;
(8) A review and analysis of present and past funding for
weather modification from all sources to determine the sources
and adequacy of funding in the light of the needs of the Nation ;
(9) A review and analysis of the purpose, policy, methods, and
funding of the Federal departments and agencies involved in
weather modification and of the existing interagency coordination
of weather modification research efforts ;
(10) A review and analysis of the necessity and feasibility of
negotiating an international agreement concerning the peaceful
uses of weather modification ; and
(11) Formulation of one or more options for a model interna-
tional agreement concerning the peaceful uses of weather modifi-
cation and the regulation of national weather modification-activ-
ities ; and a review and analysis of the necessity and feasibility of
negotiating such an agreement.18
The act directs each department and agency of the Federal Gov-
ernment to furnish pertinent information to the Secretary of Com-
merce and authorizes the Secretary in conducting the study to "solicit
and consider the views of State agencies, private firms, institutions
of higher learning, and other interested persons and governmental
entities/' 19
A final report on the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of
the required study is to be prepared by the Secretary of Commerce and
submitted to the President and the Congress. The report is to include
the following :
(1) A summary of the findings made with respect to each of the
areas of investigation delineated above ;
(2) Other findings which are pertinent to the determination
and implementation of a national policy on weather modification;
(3) A recommended national policy on weather modification
and a recommended national weather modification research and
development program, consistent with, and likely to contribute to,
achieving the objectives of such policy;
™ Ibid., spc. 4. itady.
18 Ibid., sec. 5, report.
201
(4) Recommendations for levels of Federal funding sufficient to
support adequately a national weather modification research and
development program ;
(5) Recommendations for any changes in the organization and
involvement of Federal departments and agencies in weather
modification which may be needed to implement effectively the
recommended national policy on weather modification and the
recommended research and development program ; and
(6) Recommendations for any regulatory and other legislation
which may be required to implement such policy and program or
for any international agreement which may be appropriate con-
cerning the peaceful uses of weather modification, including
recommendations concerning the dissemination, refinement, and
possible implementation of the model domestic code and inter-
national agreement developed under the specification in the list of
investigations above.20
The act stipulated that the report was to be submitted by the Secre-
tary within 1 year after the date of enactment of the law ; that is, by
October 13, 1977. Following a request by the Secretary in June of
1977 for an extension of this time allotment, a Senate bill was intro-
duced, providing for an extension of the due date of the report through
June 13, 1978. No other action on this request was taken, however,
during the first session of the 95th Congress. Meanwhile, the study
mandated by Public Law 9J-490 continues under the auspices of the
Secretary of Commerce.21
Congressional direction to the Bureau of Reclamation
Of special interest as they have affected the weather modification
activities of the Bureau of Reclamation within the Department of the
Interior are some laws not specifically concerned with weather modi-
fication as are the ones discussed above. The Reclamation Act of June
17, 1902,22 directs the Bureau to develop water resources for reclama-
tion purposes, establishing a "reclamation fund,'' which may be used,
inter alia, "in the examination and survey and for the construction and
maintenance of irrigation works for the storage, diversion, and devel-
opment of waters for the reclamation of arid and semiarid lands * * *"
throughout the 17 contiguous Western States and Hawaii. The author-
ity of the 1902 act was supplemented by the Fact Finders Act of
December 5, 1924, and amendments thereto in the act of April 19,
1945,23 which enabled the Bureau to conduct "general investigations,"
not related to specific projects, including research work, for the devel-
opment of water resources without the necessity of making the costs
thereof reimbursable.
Thus, the 1902 Reclamation Act, supplemented by the Fact Finders
Act, provides the authority for the Bureau of Reclamation to engage
in a program of weather modification research for the purpose of de-
termining practical methods of inducing precipitation and increased
runoff that can be stored in surface reservoirs and used for "the rec-
» Ibid.
21 This study is underway on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce by a Weather Modifica-
tion Advisory Board, appointed by the Secretary. See subsequent discussion of activities of
the Advisorv Board, beginning p. 231.
M 43 U.S.C. 391 et seq.
» 43 U.S.C. 377.
202
lamation of arid and semiarid lands/' Funds appropriated for weather
modification research are considered expendable on a nonreimbursable
basis.24
In 1961 the Congress specifically directed the Bureau of Reclamation
to initiate a program in weather modification through a write-in of
$100,000 to the fiscal year 190:2 Public Works Appropriation Act. This
first appropriation for the Bureau's weather modification research
and development program was added to the Appropriation Act, Public
Law 87-330 (75 Stat. 722). approved September 30, 19(31. in a con-
gressional committee of conference, under the heading, "General In-
vestigations.'' 25 The specific language which directed the weather mod-
ification research appeared in the Senate report on H.E. 9076,26 and
the provision was incorporated into the conference report without
mentioning weather modification per se. The Senate report included
the following item :
Increased rainfall by cloud seeding, $100.000. — The committee recommends al-
lowance of $100,000 to be used for research on increasing rainfall by cloud seed-
ing. This amount would be utilized in cooperation with the National Science
Foundation and the Weather Bureau, which are expected to contribute funds
and participate in this research.27
In accordance with congressional direction in the fiscal year 1962
Public Works appropriation bill, the Bureau of Reclamation estab-
lished the Atmospheric Water Resources Management Program
(^Project Sky water') in 1962. Since the start of this program con-
gressional direction has continued to be almost entirely through pro-
visions in the congressional documents relative to annual Public Works
appropriations. Appendix J is a summary of the appropriation lan-
guage contained in these documents from 1961 through 1977, which
provided such direction. It may be noted that by this means the Con-
gress has continued to provide specific direction to this program al-
most every year since its inception and has provided frequent funding
increases, often substantial, over levels budgeted by the administration.
Legislation providing for temporary authorities to the Secretary of
the Interior to facilitate emergency actions to mitigate impacts of the
1976-77 drought was enacted by the Congress and signed by President
Carter on April 7, 1977. Public Law 95-18 (91 Stat. 36) , subsequently
amended by Public Law 95-107 (91 Stat. 870) , of August 17, 1977, pro-
vided authority to appropriate $100 million for a program including
short-term actions to increase water supplies, to improve water supply
facilities, and to establish a bank of available water for redistribution.
The Bureau of Reclamation published rules in the Federal Register
whereby States could apply for nonreimbursable funds for actions
designed to augment water supplies.28 Under these provisions, requests
for funds to support weather modification activities were received from
six States.21*
Justus. John R. and Robert E .Morrison, legislative authority for atmosphere research
by Federal agencips, tbe Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, Apr. 1, 11*77
( unpublished), p. 12.
20 U.S. Congress, committee of eonferenee. public works appropriation bill. 1902; confer-
ence report to accompany II. R. 9076. Washington. D.C.. U.S. Government Printing Office,
1961, p. 24. (87th Cong., ist sess. House Rept. No. S7-126S.)
26 U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, public works appropriation bill,
1962 ; report to accompany II. R. 9076. Washington. D.C., U.S. Government Printing Oltice,
1961. p. i>4. (S7th Cong.. 1st sess. Ho.ise Rept. No. 87-1268.)
■» Ibid.
I - eral Register, vol. 42, No. 72. Thursday. Apr. 14. 1977. pp. 19609-19613.
20 The States were California. Colorado. Kansas. Nevada, North Dakota, and Utah. ?ee
discussion of the Department of the Interior activities in weather mod iri cat ion. p. 267. for
amounts of these grants.
203
PROPOSED FEDERAL LEGISLATION ON WEATHER MODIFICATION
Summary
Since 1947 at least 110 bills and 22 resolutions dealing specifically
with one or more aspects of weather modification have been introduced
in the Congress. Moreover, many additional pieces of proposed legis-
lation, providing authorization or appropriations for broader agency
programs, have given support and/or direction to weather modification
activities within Federal agencies, often without mentioning such
activities per se.
Table 1 summarizes the legislation and resolutions concerned specifi-
cally with weather modification, which were proposed from the first
session of the 80th Congress to the first session of the 95th Congress.
The table shows, for each session, the numbers of bills and resolutions
pertaining to each of several aspects of the subject and the total number
of each introduced. The numbers appearing under the several subjects
of weather modification legislation will, in general, exceed the total
number of measures introduced in a given year because many of the
bills were concerned with more than one aspect. It will be noted that a
total of six laws were passed during this period, as stated earlier. Dur-
ing the 93d Congress the Senate also passed one resolution, which sup-
ported the position that the United States should seek the agreement
of other nations to a treaty banning environmental modification as a
weapon of war.
204
ec o ■
OIL'
OS
J, » <D
g « o> «j o 5 £
«S° 2^
■5 ra 2 « c
o a g t>.= :
Q. 5
IS®
o <-> >> t ™ O.
o
4> .2 o c =
■^E = °2
cs O
:n o
« 53
lo E re
a> y
co o w c
O to 5-2
«9 O
J3 » O B
o -CI W o
t— E S=
= o
2 o
• — cni cm en cm •
*— ' LT> OO CM CM
— • CNI — ' CVJ — iCNJ— ■CNI— • CM -~ CM •
■£ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ s
i CD CD CD (
• LO to r-» OO CD
OOOOCOOOOTCOaO»OOC7)OT CD
cm n m vp p- ~
<5<
CD CD C
oocdo — csiro>o-u-)tor
I cD cD cd r — ■ r**. r — r — r**. f-* r-» r
205
It can be seen from the table that congressional activity has often
evolved in accordance with the emergence of various interests and
issues. Thus, in the 1950's and 1960's there were strong attempts to
initiate and support Federal research and/or operational programs,
usually within one or another of several specified departments or agen-
cies. From time to time emphasis has been given to evaluating weather
modification technology and establishing a national policy, usually
: through mandating an in-depth study ; such study was sometimes to be
undertaken by a select committee established for that purpose. In the
1970*3 two thrusts in proposed legislation have dealt with regulating
and or licensing of operations and with reporting weather modifica-
tion activities to the Federal Government, both reflecting increased
concern on the part of large segments of the public about unknown
effects of such operations and about legal and economic ramifications
of increased or decreased precipitation. Obvious too in the 1970's is the
reaction of Congress to public concern about the use of weather modi-
fication as a weapon, as 18 resolutions dealing with that subject were
introduced in both Houses since 1971.
Specific measures of recent years on weather modification, those
introduced in the 94th Congress and the first session of the 95th Con-
gress, are summarized in the following section.
Legislation proposed in the 9J/.th and 95th Congress, 1st session
Proposed legislation and resolutions appearing during the 94th Con-
gress reflected concern over many current problem areas in weather
modification coming into focus today, areas over which it is considered
by many that the Federal Government should have some jurisdiction.
Based upon a number of specific measures introduced during that Con-
gress and the ensuing discussions thereon, there emerged the National
Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-490), which
could be a landmark, in that studies and decisions pursuant to that act
may lead to definition of a clear Federal policy for the first time in
recent years. The bills submitted thus far in the 95th Congress address
some concerns not dealt with in the recent law and may presage stipula-
tions which could conceivably be incorporated into future Federal pol-
icy. Undoubtedly, the 96th Congress will see a greater abundance of
proposed legislation dealing with Federal policy on weather modifica-
tion, following receipt by the Congress of the report from the Secre-
tary of Commerce recommending a national policy and a program of
Federal research and development.30 Measures introduced during the
94th Congress and the first session of the 95th Congress are summarized
below :
9ifh Congress, 1st session
S. 2705. — To provide for a study, within the Department of
Commerce, by a National Weather Modification Commission, of
the research needs for weather modification, the status of current
technologies, the extent of coordination, and the appropriate
responsibility for operations in the field of weather modification.
(Hearing was held Feb. 17, 1976.)
S. 2706. — To authorize and direct the Secretary of Commerce to
plan and carry out a 10-year experimental research program to
SP Public Law 94-490 directs the Secretary of Commerce to conduct a study on weather
modification and to submit a report to the President and the Congress, recommending a na-
tional policy and a program of Federal research and development in weather modification.
34-857—79 16
206
determine the feasibility of and the most effective methods for
drought prevention by weather modification. Directs the Secre-
tary to appoint an Advisory Board and provides for consulta-
tion with State and local governments starting weather modifica-
tion efforts for drought alleviation. (Hearing was held Feb. 17,
1976.)
S. 2707. — To authorize the Secretary of Commerce to carry out
a program of assistance to States in preventing and alleviating
drought emergencies. (Hearing was held Feb. 17, 1976.)
H.R. 167. — To prohibit the United States from engaging in
weather modification activities, including cloud seeding and fire
storms, for military purposes. (No action.)
H.R. 274-2. — Directed the Secretaries of Agriculture and Inte-
rior to permit the conduct of weather modification activities, in-
cluding both atmospheric and surface activities and environ-
mental research, which are over, or may affect, areas which are
part of the National Wilderness Preservation System or other
Federal lands. Authorized the respective Secretaries to prescribe
such operating and monitoring conditions as each deems neces-
sary to minimize or avoid long-term and intensive local impact
on the wilderness character of the areas affected. (No action.)
H.R. 4325. — Weather Modification and Precipitation Manage-
ment Act. Authorized the Secretary of the Interior to establish
precipitation management projects in order to augment U.S.
usable water resources. Authorized the Secretary to engage in
operational demonstration projects for potential use in precipita-
tion management programs in certain States and to settle and
pay claims against the United States for injury, death, or losses
resulting from weather modification pursuant to provisions of
this act. (No action.)
H.R. 4338. — Designated specific lands within the Sequoia and
Sierra National Forests, Calif., as the "Monarch Wilderness,"
abolishing the previous classification of the "High Sierra Primi-
tive Area." Directed the Secretary of Agriculture to authorize use
of hydrological devices and to provide for weather modification
activities within such wilderness. (No action.)
H.R. 10039. — Weather Modification Research, Development, and
Control Act of 1975. Directed the Secretary of Commerce to es-
tablish a weather modification research and development pro-
gram to evaluate the specific needs and uses of weather modifi-
cation and directed the Secretary to establish a weather modifica-
tion information system. Prohibited individuals from engaging
in weather modification activities without obtaining a permit from
the Secretary and authorized the President to enter into inter-
national agreements to foster establishment of international sys-
tems for monitoring and regulation of weather modification ac-
tivities. (Joint hearings were held on H.R. 10039 and S. 3383,
June 15-18, 1976 ; no further action on H.R, 10039.)
77. Res, 28. — Expressed the sense of the House of Rep-
resentatives that the U.S. Government should seek agreement with
ot her members of the United Nations on the prohibition of weather
207
modification as a weapon of war. (Hearing was held July 29, 1975 ;
no further action.)
H. Res. 103.— Same as H. Res. 28. (No action.)
94th Congress, 2d Session
S. 3383.— National Weather Modification Policy Act. Directed
the Secretary of Commerce to conduct a comprehensive study of
scientific knowledge concerning weather modification and tech-
nology of weather modification. Required the Secretary to prepare
and submit to the President and the Congress a final report on
the findings and conclusions of such study, including a recom-
mended national policy on weather modification. Extended
through fiscal year 1980 appropriation authorization for the
weather modification activities oversight program of the Depart-
ment of Commerce. (Reported to Senate, May 13, 1976, in lieu
of S. 2705, S. 2706, and S. 2707; considered and passed by Sen-
ate, May 21, 1976; hearings held jointly in House subcommittee
on S. 3383 and H.R. 10039, June 15-18, 1976 ; called up under mo-
tion to suspend the rules, considered, and passed by the House,
amended, Sept. 20, 1976; Senate agreed to House amendments,
Sept. 28, 1976; and approved as Public Law 94-490, Oct. 13,
1976.)
H.R. 14S '44- — Extended through fiscal year 1980 appropriations
authorization for the weather modification activities oversight
program of the Department of Commerce. ( No action. )
95th Congress, 1st Session
S. 1938.— To extend the National Weather Modification Policy
Act of 1976 by extending the date for submission of the required
report of the Secretary of Commerce to June 13, 1978. (No action.)
H.R. 4069.— Weather Modification Regulation Act of 1977:
Requires weather modification licenses and permits, establishes
reporting requirements to be administered by the Secretary of
Commerce, and requires the Secretary to establish a weather mod-
ification information system. Authorizes the President to enter
into international agreements to foster establishment of interna-
tional systems for monitoring and regulation of weather modifica-
tion activities. (No action.)
H.R. 4461— Same as H.R. 2742, introduced during 94th Con-
gress, first session. (No action.)
H. Res. 236. — Declares it to be the sense of the House of Repre-
sentatives that the United States should seek an agreement with
other members of the United Nations to prohibit research, experi-
mentation, or the use of weather modification as a weapon. (No
action.) 31
OTHER CONGRESSIONAL ACTIVITIES
Resolutions on toeather modification
As noted earlier, some 22 resolutions related to weather modification
have been introduced over the past 30 years in both Houses of the
Congress. For convenience, data on these resolutions are included along
witli that on proposed legislation in table 1 and in the discussion
31 See ch. 10 for a discussion of the development of 6uch a U.N. convention, opened for
signature in Geneva, May 18. 1977.
208
thereon, and three resolutions are included in the preceding list of
summaries of weather modification bills appearing during the 94th
and 95th Congresses.
By far, the largest number of weather modification resolutions, 18
in all, have been concerned with barring the use of weather modifica-
tion as a weapon of war. Introduction of such resolutions began during
the 92d Congress in 1971, and, using similar language, they express
the sense of either House or of the Congress that the United States
should seek an agreement with other U.1\T. members, prohibiting such
use of environmental modification, including weather modification. In
1973. the Senate passed S. Res. 71, which had been intro-
duced by Senator Claiborne Pell. This and other resolutions urging
prohibition of environmental modification for purposes of warfare
were prompted by a series of hearings and communications between
Senator Pell and the Department of Defense on the alleged use of
weather modification technology as a weapon in Vietnam by U.S. mili-
tary forces.32
Four other weather modification resolutions, introduced in the 1950's
and 1960?s, pertained to the undertaking of comprehensive studies on
the subject, either by special committees to be established by the Con-
gress or by departments and/or agencies of the executive branch.
Hearings
Cognizant subcommittees of both Houses have conducted hearings
concerned, at least in part, with Federal weather modification activi-
ties, from time to time and annually, in connection with oversight of
agency programs, authorizing legislation, and annual appropriations.
In addition, more comprehensive hearings on the subject have been
important parts of the legislative activities leading to passage of the
major public laws on weather modification, which have been enacted
since 1953.
Of particular interest in recent years are the extensive hearings con-
ducted during 1976 by the Subcommittee on Oceans and Atmosphere
of the Senate Committee on Commerce 33 and by the Subcommittee on
the Environment and the Atmosphere of the House Committee on
Science and Technology.34 The documents produced from these hear-
ings contain the testimony of a number of expert witnesses on various
aspects of weather modification as well as reproductions of numerous
pertinent documents which were incorporated into the records of the
hearings. References to documents on other weather modification hear-
ings conducted in recent years are contained in the bibliography of
congressional publications in appendix H.
On October 26, 1977, the Subcommittee on the Environment and the
Atmosphere of the House Committee on Science and Technology con-
ducted a special hearing on the National Weather Modification Policy
Act of 1976 (Public Law 94^90) . Among other witnesses, Mr. Harlan
Cleveland. Chairman of the Commerce Department's Weather Modi-
-' The correspondence and hearings on the use of weather modification as a weapon in
Vietnam and of the development of a U.N. treaty barring environmental modification in war-
far* are discussed among other international aspects of weather modification in ch. 10.
"'; U.S. Congress, Senate. Committee on Commerce. Subcommittee on Oceans and Atmos-
phere. Atmospheric Research Control Act. hearing. 94th Cong., 2d sess., on S. 2705. S. 2706,
and S 2707. Feb. 17. 1976, Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976. 297 pp.
M TVS. Congress. House, Committee on Science and Technology, Subcommittee on the En-
vironment and the Atmosphere. Weather modification, hearings, 94th Cong.. 2d sess.. on
TT i: ino?,f> and S. 3383, June 15-18, 1976, Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office,
1976, 524 pp.
209
fication Advisory Board, briefed the subcommittee on progress of the
Board in carrying out for the Secretary of Commerce the comprehen-
sive study required by the act and also reported on findings of the
Board to date in a discussion paper which he submitted for the record.33
Studies and reports by congressional support agencies
In addition to the studies and reports of the executive branch which
were mandated by the Congress through legislation, studies have also
been undertaken on behalf of the Congress by congressional support
agencies on at least three occasions. The present report, requested in
1976 by the Senate Committee on Commerce, was preceded by a similar
study and report requested a decade earlier by the same committee.36
In 1974, the General Accounting Office (GAO) conducted a critical
review of ongoing Federal research programs in weather modification
and prepared a report to the Congress on the need for a national pro-
gram.37 A discussion of the findings and recommendations of this GAO
study, along with those of other major Government and non-Govern-
ment studies, is undertaken in a later chapter of this report.3S
Activities of the Executive Branch
introduction
The executive branch of the Federal Government sponsors nearly
all of the weather modification research projects in the United States,
under a variety of programs scattered through at least six departments
and agencies. The National Atmospheric Sciences Program for 19 7S 39
includes information on specific programs of the Departments of Agri-
culture, Commerce, Defense, and the Interior and of the Energy Re-
search and Development Administration (now part of the Department
of Energy) and the National Science Foundation. In recent years
weather modification research programs were also identified by the De-
partment of Transportation and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.
In addition to specific programs sponsored by Federal agencies, there
are other functions relevant to weather modification which are per-
formed in several places in the structure of the executive branch. Vari-
ous Federal advisory panels and committees and their staffs, which
have been established to conduct in-dep>th studies and prepare compre-
hensive reports, to provide advice and recommendations, or to coordi-
35 Cleveland. Harlan, "A U.S. Policy To Enhance the Atmospheric Environment." A dis-
cussion paper by the Weather Modification Advisory Board, Oct. 21, 1977. Submitted as part
of testimonv in hearing: U.S. Congress. House of Representatives, Committee on Science
and Technology. Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere, "Weather Modi-
fication." 95th Cong., 1st sess., Oct. 26, 1977, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1977, pp. 2-49.
36 U.S. Library of Congress, Legislative Reference Service, "Weather Modification and Con-
trol," a report prepared by Lawton M. Hartman and others for the use of the Committee on
Commerce. U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, Apr. 27, 1966,
181 pp. (89th Cong., 2d sess., Senate Rept. No. 1139.)
87 Comptroller General of the United States, "Need for a National Weather Modification
Research Program," report to the Congress, U.S. General Accounting Office, Washington,
B.C., Aug. 23, 1974, 71 pp.
38 See eh. 6. p. 324.
39 The National Atmospheric Sciences Program, including the Federal program in weather
modification, is published annually in a report of the Interdepartmental Committee for
Atmospheric Sciences. The most recent such report, containing a discussion of and funding
for the fiscal year 1978 program is the following : Federal Coordinating Council for Science,
Engineering, and Technology. Committee on Atmosphere and Oceans, Interdepartmental
Committee for Atmospheric Sciences. National Atmospheric Sciences Program, fiscal year
1978, ICAS 21-FY78, September 1977, pp. 87-94.
210
hale Federal weather modification programs have been housed and
supported within executive departments, agencies, or offices. For exam-
ple, the National Advk^iy Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere
(XACOA) and the Weather Modification Advisory Board are sup-
ported through the Department of Commerce. While the membership
of the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences
(ICAS) comes from each of the Federal departments and agencies
with atmospheric science programs, its staff has been housed in the
National Science Foundation.
The program whereby Federal and non-Federal U.S. weather mod-
ification activities are reported to the Federal Government is adminis-
tered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(XOAA) within the Department of Commerce. Under this program a
central file is maintained on all such projects in the United States,
and summary reports on these projects are published on a nearly
annual basis by NOAA.
The United States has been active in at least two areas of interna-
tional interest in weather modification. One aspect has been the efforts
through the United Nations to promote the adoption of a treaty bar-
ring weather modification as a military weapon. There is also a U.S.
interest in international efforts to modify the environment for bene-
ficial purposes. The State Department is active in negotiating agree-
ments with other countries which might be affected by U.S. experiments
and has also arranged for Federal agencies and other U.S. investiga-
tors for participation in international meterological projects, includ-
ing weather modification, under the World Meteorological Organiza-
tion (WMO). These activities are discussed in more detail in a subse-
quent chapter on international aspects of weather modification.40
In the next subsection there is an attempt to describe the Federal
organizational structure for weather modification, at least to the extent
that such a structure exists, has existed, or may exist in the near
future. Other subsections address Federal coordination and advisory
groups, the weather modification activities reporting program, and
the array of Federal studies and reports which have been undertaken
by the executive branch, either as required by law or initiated within
the branch. A summary of the Federal research program and detailed
descriptions of each of the several agencies programs in weather modi-
fication are contained in a separate major section at the end of this
chapter.41
INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE FEDERAL WEATHER MODIFICATION
PROGRAM
Cum nt status of Federal organization for weather modification
The present Federal structure of weather modification research
activities is characterized esseiitially by the mission-oriented approach,
where each of six or seven deportments and agencies conducts its
own program in accordance with broad agency goals or under specific
directions from the Congress or the Executive. The exception to this
approach is the program of the Xational Science Foundation, whose
funded weather modification research activities have included a broad
<° Spp en i o.
11 See p. 241 ff.
211
range of individual fundamental problem investigations, research
supporting some aspects of the project of other Federal agencies,
and conduct of major projects initiated by the Foundation. The pro-
grams of the several agencies have been loosely coordinated with others
through various independent arrangements and/or advisory panels
and particularlv through the Interdepartmental Committee for At-
mospheric Sciences (ICAS). The ICAS, established in 1959 by the
former Federal Council for Science and Technology, provides advice
on matters related to atmospheric science in general and has also been
the principal coordinating mechanism for Federal research in the
field of weather modification. The following observation on the cur-
rent Federal weather modification organizational structure was stated
recently by the chairman of the ICAS :
Organization [s] doing the research [should] be knowledgeable of the sector
of the public that is to be involved with special weather modification techniques.
There is no single agency within the Government that knows all of the problems
of society vis-a-vis weather modification. As things stand, the individual weather
modification programs being carried out by the various ICAS member agencies
are being pursued in concert with the missions of those agencies.42
The nature of the present Federal organizational structure for
weather modification is related to and results from the prevailing
policy, or lack of such policy, currently subscribed to by the Federal
Government regarding weather modification. The clearest statement
of such a policy came in a reply to a 1975 letter from Congressmen
Gilbert Gude and Donald M. Fraser and Senator Claiborne Pell,
addressed to the President, urging that a coordinated Federal program
in the peaceful uses of weather be initiated.43 In the official response
from the executive branch, written by Norman E. Ross, Jr., Assistant
Director of the Domestic Council, the current Federal weather modifi-
cation policy was affirmed :
We believe that the agency which is charged with the responsibility for deal-
ing with a particular national problem should be given the latitude to seek
the best approach or solution to the problem. In some instances this may involve
a form of weather modification, while in other instances other approaches may
be more appropriate.
While we would certainly agree that some level of coordination of weather
modification research efforts is logical, we do not believe that a program under
the direction of any one single agency's leadership is either necessary or
desirable. We have found from our study that the types of scientific research
conducted by agencies are substantially different in approach, techniques, and
type of equipment employed, depending on the particular weather phenomena
being addressed. * * * Each type of weather modification requires a different form
of program management and there are few common threads which run along
all programs.44
Recently, the Chairman of the Commerce Department's Weather
Modification Advisory Board, Harlan Cleveland, expressed the
Board's opinion of the current Federal policy and structure :
The United States does not now have a weather modification policy. The
three main Federal actors in weather modification research are NOAA in the
42 Testimony of Dr. Edward P. Todd In U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Commit-
tee on Science and Teehnolosy, Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere,
'Weather Modification." hearings. 94th Cong., 2d sess.. June 15-18, 1976. Washington. D.C.,
T.S. Government Printing Office, 1976, p. 81.
43 Gude. Gilbert. "Weather Modification." Congressional Record. June 17. 1975, pp. 19201-
192f>3. (The statement in the Congressional Record, including the letter to the President
and the official reply, are reproduced in app. A.)
" Ibid.
212
Department of Commerce, the Bureau of Reclamation in the Department of
the Interior, and the National Science Foundation. . . . Their combined R and D
efforts can only be described as fragmented and famished, living from hand to
mouth on each agency's relationship with a different congressional subcommittee,
with no sense of a national policy or program. . . . The agencies that are involved,
and their university and other contractors and grantees, have developed, despite
the fragmentation, remarkably effective informal relationships which make
the coordination and mutual assistance better than the division of roles and
missions would indicate.45
A somewhat different viewpoint, but related in several points to the
preceding opinions w*as expressed in 1976 by Dr. Ronald L. Lavoie,
Director of NOAA's Environmental Modification Office, addressing
the second meeting of the North American Interstate Weather Modifi-
cation Council :
Let me address the question of current Federal policies in weather modifi-
cation— the statement has been made that there aren't any. I think that I must
disagree with that statement. There are, in fact, such policies although they
are perhaps unobtrusive or low-key. They certainly aren't propounded very
loudly, but I think it is safe to say that there is some Federal policy on weather
modification. . . . For example, in the area of research and operations the Federal
policy, or you may call it strategy, is to leave it to the specialized agencies to
fund research and to develop or apply weather modification in carrying out their
particular missions. One can argue with this policy ; nevertheless, it does
exist. . . . One shouldn't get the impression, however, that this is an entirely
fragmented effort. . . . There is some coordination or integration, at least in the
sense that technocrats responsible for advising the agencies in these matters get
together to discuss issues and share problems Nevertheless, there is no Fed-
eral or national commitment to weather modification, and I believe that this is
what was implied when it was said that there was no national policy.*8
Yet another observation on the subject of Federal organization is
that expressed in the 1974 report by the U.S. General Accounting
Office:
Our review of the Federal weather modification research activities supports
the findings of nearly a decade of studies. These studies conducted by scientific
panels, committees, and other groups all identified common problems — ineffec-
tive coordination, fragmented research, and research efforts that are subcritical
(funded below the level necessary to produce timely, effective results). Most
studies proposed a common solution. What was needed, in essence, was a
national research program under a single Federal agency responsible for estab-
lishing plans and priorities, obtaining the needed funds from the Congress,
managing research efforts, and accounting for the results its programs achieved.
To date, except for the establishment of several coordinating committees,
subcommittees, and advisory panels — none of which have the authority to take
action to correct problems already identified — an effective overall national
weather modification research program has not been established.47
There is some consensus that the apparent fragmentation and lack
of a cohesive Federal effort have not only prevented the growth of a
strong, adequately funded research program but may have also
retarded progress in development of weather modification technology
45 Cleveland, Harlan. "A U.S. Policy To Enhance the Atmospheric Environment." A dis-
cussion paper by the Weather Modification Advisory Board, Oct. 21, 1977. (Submitted as
part of testimony in hearing : U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Sci-
ence and Technology. Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere, "Weathel
Modification," Oct. 26, 1977. p. 41.)
49 Lavoie, Ronald L.. "Effects of Legislation on Federal Programs and the Prospect of Fed-
eral Involvement." In proceedings of Conference on Weather Modification, Today and Tomor-
row : second annual meeting of the North American Interstate Weather Modification Coun-
cil, Kansas City, Mo., Jan. 15-16. 1976, pub. No. 76-1, pp. 56-57.
*" Comptroller General of the United States. "Need for a National Weather Modification
Research Program." report to the Congress. U.S. General Accounting Oftlce, B-133202, Wash-
ington, D.C., Aug. 23, 1974, p. 3.
213
itself. Many feel strongly that assignment of a "lead agency" would
solidify and strengthen the Federal effort. To others, however, "* * *
the present structure for Federal Government activity in weather mod-
ification appears to be working satisfactorily," 48 and the existence of
separate agency programs fosters increased understanding through
independent research projects and through the cross- fertilization of
ideas and exchange of findings achieved in cooperative projects, in
professional meetings, and through program-level coordination.
In a recent Federal study on weather modification, a subcommittee
of the Domestic Council could not reach a consensus on the proper
institutional structure for planning and management of the national
weather modification research effort. Consequently, both of the posi-
tions noted above were identified as options for such Federal
structure : 49
Option (1) : Continue coordination and planning of the national
weather modification effort through the Interdepartmental Committee
for Atmospheric Sciences of the Federal Council for Science and
Technology, with individual agencies pursuing their mission responsi-
bilities.
Option (2) : Establish a lead agency to foster the broad advance-
ment of the science and technology of weather modification as
recommended by the National Advisory Committee on Oceans and
Atmosphere, the National Academy of Sciences, and other groups to
coordinate and plan the national effort with the assistance and partici-
pation of other agencies.
Those who espouse the latter position feel that the lead agency
responsibility should include the following functions : 50
The lead agency would assume the leadership for planning the
Federal weather modification program, in concert with those other
concerned agencies, universities, and the private sector.
The lead agency would present, within the executive branch, a
consolidated national weather modification research plan and be
available to represent the national plan before the Congress.
The lead agency would, within the framework of the joint plan-
ning effort, encourage and assist in justifying programmatic ac-
tivities in other agencies that might contribute significantly to the
national weather modification objectives, especially when those
programs can be implemented as supplements to the agencies'
ongoing mission-related activities.
The lead agency would take on the responsibility for presenting
the budgetary requirements to carry out the national plan to the
Office of Management and Budget and, with due consideration of
overall priorities of the agency, would seek to provide within its
own budget for activities essential to the national plan and not
incorporated in the budgets of the other agencies.
The history of the organization of the Federal program in weather
modification, to the extent that such a structure has existed, can be
4* Testimony of Dr. Alfred J. Esgers. Jr.. Assistant Director for Research Applications,
National Science Foundation in U.S. Congress. House of Representatives. Committee on
Seienr-e and Technology. Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere. "Weather
Modification. " v>earin£s. 04th Consr.. 2d sess., June 15-1S, 1976, Washington, D.C., U.S. Gov-
ernment Printing: Office. 1976. p. 109.
49 U.S. Domestic Council. Environmental Resources Committee. Subcommittee on Climate
Change, "The Federal Role in Weather Modification." Washington, D.C, December 1975,
p. 19.
60 Ibid., app. A, pp. A-2 and A-3.
214
conveniently divided into three periods, each roughly a decade long.
These periods and the characteristics of the Federal organization dur-
ing each are discussed briefly below.
Federal structure; 194-6-57
As seen in the earlier historical account of weather modification, in
the period from 1946 through 1957 practically all projects in the
United States were conducted by private individuals and by industry
supported through private funds. What activities the U.S. agencies
did support were both mission oriented and mostly uncoordinated. The
Defense Department developed an early research program, specifically
in seeding technology and hardware. Since World War II, the Air
Force had a continuing need to dissipate fog, and the Korean war and
SAC missions during this period required airports to be open to permit
unrestricted flights. The Navy developed a strong research capability
at its China Lake, Calif., laboratory, concentrating on seeding de-
vices and materials. Project Cirrus, a joint project of the Army Signal
Corps, the Navy, and the Air Force, was initiated by the Defense
Department in 1947 and continued through 1952.
Civilian implications for weather modification were investigated
by the U.S. Weather Bureau of the Commerce Department in 1948 as
part of its cloud physics program. The Bureau's early position, how-
ever, seemed to lack enthusiasm for a research program at the time,
largely reflecting agency conservatism and some unwillingness to be
caught up in a technology that was fraught with exaggerated claims
of commercial rainmakers.51 This early negative outlook of the
Weather Bureau was modified in the late 1960's when its successive
parent organizations, the Environmental Science Services Adminis-
tration (ESSA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin-
istration (NOAA), inaugurated a fresh interest in a weather modifi-
cation research program. The Weather Bureau did participate with
the Navy in project SCUD in 1953-54 along the east coast, in an
attempt to modify the behavior of extratropical cyclones by artificial
nucleation.
The third Federal agency conducting weather modification re-
search during this period was the Forest Service of the U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, which in 1953 initiated Project Skyfire, aimed
at suppressing lightning, a major cause of forest fires. This project
received joint support later during the 1960's from the National Sci-
ence Foundation, and. until its demise in 1976. was the longest run-
ning single Federal weather modification research project.
Confusion and uncertainty in the state of weather modification,
owing to a mixed reaction to achipA-oments and claims of achieve-
ment of weathor modification operators and to the lack of a cohesive
research program in the Federal Government, led to the establish-
ment in 1953 of the Advisory Committee on Weather Control, by
Public Law 83-256. During the conduct of the intensive investiga-
tion of the subject by the Advisory Committee between 1953 and
r>1 Communications from F. W. Reichelderfer. Chief of the U.S. Weather Bureau, in U.S.
Congress. Senate. Committees on Interior and Insular Affairs. Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, and Agriculture and Forestry, "Weather Control and Augmented Potable Water
Supply," Joinl hearings, ,92d Cong., 1st sess.. Mar. 14. 15, 16, 19 and Apr. 5, 1951, Washing-
ton, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1951, pp. 37^17.
215
1957. the committee seems to have provided somewhat of a coordina-
tion function and even some modicum of direction to the Federal
effort it was studying. There was support in the Congress for both
the formulation and the Federal management by the Advisory Com-
mittee of a 5-year Federal-State weather modification research pro-
gram, to be conducted by the committee, the States, universities, and
private institutions.52 The Advisory Committee favored an existing
Federal agency, however, for this proposed management function.
Federal structure; 1958-68
The Advisory Committee, reporting in 1957, provided a setting
for progress over the next 10 years, as it presented elements of a
national policy and guidelines for future development of a research
program. A former NSF program manager for weather modifica-
tion, Earl G. Droessler, recently praised the work of the Advisory
Committee :
The Committee did a remarkable job for weather modification. Perhaps, most
importantly, its careful study and reporting in the 1950's gave a measure of
respect, cohesion, and momentum for the field of weather modification, and
thus provided a setting for progress over the next decade and more. Prior to
the work of the committee, the field was plagued with tension and
uncertainty.53
Encouraging a wide research program in meterology as the essen-
tial foundation for understanding weather modification, the Ad-
visory Committee named the National Science Foundation as its rec-
ommended agency for sponsoring the required research program.
Accordingly, the Congress, when it enacted Public Law 85-510, di-
rected the NSF to initiate and support a program in weather modi-
fication and effectively named the NSF as lead Federal agency for
weather modification.
Weather modification research enjoyed a position of high value
and priority among the top leadership of the Foundation.54 The XSF
promoted a vigorous research program through grants to universi-
ties, scientific societies and the National Academy of Sciences, in-
dustry, and agencies of the Federal Government and established
an Advisory Panel for Weather Modification, which reported to
the Foundation. A series of 10 annual reports on weather modifica-
tion were published by the NSF for fiscal years 1959 through 1968.
Recognizing the severe shortage of trained personnel, the NSF es-
tablished the policy of financing graduate and postgraduate train-
ing as part of its grant support program, stating in its second annual
report, "In the field of weather modification our greatest deficiency
today is skilled manpower." 55
At the working level, representatives of nine Government agencies
were called together by the NSF to form the Interagency Conference
on Weather Modification to afford a mechanism for communication on
weather modification activities and to plan and develop cooperative
32 See. for example. S. 86 and companion House bills. H.R. 3631. H.R. '5232, H.R. 5954,
and H.R. 5958. introduced in the 85th Congress during 1957.
53 Droessler. Earl G.. "Weather Modification : Federal Policies. Funding from all Sources,
Interagency Coordination," background paper prepared for the U.S. Department of Com-
merce Weather Modification Advisorv Board. Raleigh, N.C., Mar. 1, 1977, p. 1.
"Ibid., p. 2.
5r> National Science Foundation. "Weather Modification ; Second Annual Report for Fiscal
Year ended June 30, 1960." Washington. D.C.. U.S. Government Printing Office, June 16,
1961. p. 1.
216
projects.56 Joint Federal projects were established between the Foun-
dation- and the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Interior.
During this period the Congress, wanting to support more applied re-
search directed toward a major problem, such as requirements for more
precipitation in the West, appropriated funds for what was to become
a major weather modification program under the Bureau of Reclama-
tion in the Department of the Interior. The Foundation warmly en-
dorsed the Bureau of Reclamation's "Project Sky water" and has since
funded many of the research projects associated with this program.57
Fi deral structure; 1968-77
The lead agency responsibilities and authorities of the National
Science Foundation acquired in 1958 under Public Law 85-510 were
abrogated by Public Law 90-407, enacted July 18, 1968, which became
effective September 1, 1968. A lapse in Federal policy and Federal
structure has since occurred as a result of congressional and executive
inaction, although after a hiatus of over 3 years, some responsibility
was given to XOAA in 1971; namely, that for collecting and dis-
seminating information on weather modification projects in the United
States. This requirement, directed by Public Law 92-205, of Decem-
ber 18, 1971, has been the single Federal weather modification function
prescribed by law until 1976, when Public Law 94-490 required the
Secretary of Commerce to conduct a study to recommend a national
policy and a research program in weather modification. The lead
agency responsibility has never been reassigned, and Federal leader-
ship for research purposes is dispersed among the several agencies.
The only semblance of weather modification leadership in the Fed-
eral structure during this period has been through the coordination
mechanism of the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sci-
ences (ICAS). The ICAS has established some policy guidelines and
has sponsored activities, such as the annual interagency weather modi-
fication conferences, intended to foster cooperation among agency
programs. It has not assumed a management role nor has it sought to
intervene in the budgeting processes by which the several agency pro-
grams are supported. The activities of the ICAS are discussed in more
detail in a section to follow on coordination of Federal weather modi-
fication activities.
Future Federal organization for weather modification
The present intensive study underway within the Department of
Commerce, as directed by the National Weather Modification Policy
Act of 1976, Public Law 94-490, mav be laying the groundwork for a
clear Federal policy in weather modification, after a 10-year lapse in
Federal leadership and two decades after the first major Federal
wpp.ther modification study wns submitted to the President and the
Concrress. The new approach will benefit from scientific and technical
advnn^os as well as the greater attention which has been given in recent
54 t< n annual interaerpnev conferences on weather modification wore sponsored by the
National Seience Foundation throujrh 10f»S. Since that year, when the lead asrency role was
fn1-Pn from t|lfl -yQ-p r,v public Law 00 407. the annual interagency conference has been
sponsored by the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (TCAS>. The 11th
conference sponsored by ICAS. was conducted by the NSF at t^e request of ICAS : banning
with tbe 12th. the annual conference have been conducted by NO A A. at the request of ICAS,
th%°PrC^ess1 — "^Weather Modification: Federal Policies, Funding from all Sources, Inter-
agency Coordination," 1977, p. 4.
217
years to legal, social, economic, ecological, and international aspects
of the subject. Part of the national policy which will presumably be
established by the Congress following the study (very likely during
the 96th Congress) will be a reorganized or reconstituted Federal
structure for leading and managing the Federal activities in weather
modification.
Kecognizing that most studies of the past decade have proposed solv-
ing the apparent fragmentation of Federal projects and responsibil-
ities by redesignating a lead agency, and also observing some of the
objections and shortcomings of such a designation, the Commerce De-
partment's Weather Modification Advisory Board has considered vari-
ous options for structuring the Federal program. One possible option
the Board is considering in its study is the creation of a special agency
for weather modification, "with a mandate to learn what needs to be
learned about weather modification and to insure regulation of its
practice," 58 The new agency would "plan, budget, spur, supervise, and
continually evalute a Federal program of research and development,
designed to enhance the atmospheric environment." Under this concept
existing agency projects would become part of a coordinated Federal
effort, and future projects would be presented to the Congress and to
the Executive "as an understandable part of a coherent R and D
strategy." 59
The Advisory Board has had difficulty in deciding where such a new
agency should be placed in the executive structure. Presumably it could
be made part of an existing structure or it could be established as a
"semi-autonomous" agency attached to an existing department for ad-
ministrative purposes and support. With the creation of a Department
of Natural Resources, as has been proposed, a logical departmental
home for the suggested weather modification agency would be found.
The Board further suggests that such a new agency, regardless of its
location in the Federal structure, should work closely with a small
(five- to nine-member) Advisory Board, composed of people ac-
quainted with atmospheric sciences, user needs, operational realities,
advantages of costs and benefits, and "the broader national and inter-
national issues involved." 60
The current thinking of the Weather Modification Advisory Board
also includes a laboratory center as part of the proposed new agency,
one newly established or an existing Federal laboratory converted to
weather modification research. While some research and development
would be conducted "in house" by the agency, portions of the coordi-
nated research effort would be allocated to other Federal agencies or by
contract to universities and other non-Federal institutions.61
Droessler has also observed increased individual support for the con-
cept of a weather modification national laboratory. lie suggests that
the location of such a center in the Federal structure should be deter-
mined by its principal research thrust. If basic scientific research, such
as that which "undergirds" weather modification applications, is pri-
mary, he suggests that NSF should have the responsibility. If the focus
of the new proposed laboratory should be on severe storm amelioration,
58 Cleveland, "A U.S. Policy to Enhance the Atmospheric Environment," discussion paper
by thp Weather Modification Advisorv Board. Oct. 21, 1977, pp. 23-24.
69 Ibid., p. 24.
60 Ibid.
61 Ibid., p. 25.
218
including hurricane research, NO AA should be the management choice.
Finally, if research of the new laboratory is aimed toward the impacts
of weather modification on agriculture, the U.S. Department of Agri-
culture should be directed to establish and manage the facility.62
A number of bills were introduced in the Congress from time to time
which would have established within one agency or another a single
agency with responsibility for managing a Federal weather modifica-
tion program. For example, S. 2875 in the 89th Congress would have
created in the Department of the Interior a central scientific and en-
gineering facility and regional research and operations centers. In the
same Congress, S. 2916, which did pass the Senate, would have pro-
vided much the same structure within the Department of Commerce.
Both bills permitted weather modification research in support of mis-
sions by the other Federal agencies, but established a focal point for
research and for other management functions in the Department of the
Interior or the Department of Commerce, respectively.63
In addition to management of Federal research programs and co-
ordination of these programs, the Federal weather modification orga-
nizational structure must also be concerned with other functions. These
could include planning, project review, data collection and monitoring,
regulation, licensing, and indemnification. The institutional arrange-
ment within which these activities are handled could be part of the
agency with prime research responsibility, or some or all of these func-
tions could be assigned elsewhere. For example, the State Department
will presumably continue to exercise appropriate authorities with
regard to international programs or U.S. programs with potential
impacts on other nations, though responsibility for cooperation on
the scientific and technical aspects of such projects would quite natur-
ally be given to one or more research agencies. Assignment of some of
these functions might be to other agencies or to special commissions,
established as in some States, to deal with regulation, licensing, and
indemnification.
Grant argues that "the extensive multidisciplinary nature of and
the potential impact on large segments of society by weather modifica-
tion demands great breadth in the organizational structure to manage
the development of weather modification." 64 He continues :
In view of these complex involvements and interactions, it is clear that the
governmental organizational structure needs to he much broader than the mis-
sion interests of the respective Federal agencies. Presently, coordination is
effected through ICAS. More is required. The present program in weather modi-
fication is too fragmented for optimal utilization of resources to concentrate on
all aspects of the priority problems. Weather modification has not moved to the
stage where research should be concentrated in the respective mission agencies.
Many of the priorities and problems are basic to weather modification itself
and must l>e resolved and tested before emphasis is placed on the respective mis-
62 Droessler, "Weather Modification : Federal Policies, Funding From All Sources, Inter-
agency Coordination." 1!)77. pp. 10—11.
•> For analysis of these and other related bills concerned with Federal organization for
weather modification see Johnson. Ralph W.. "Federal Organization for Control of Weather
Modification." In Howard J. Taubenfeld (editor), "Controlling the Weather," New York.
Dunellen. 1970. pp. 145-158.
64 Grant. Lewis (>.. testimony in : U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on
Science and Technology, Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere. "Weather
Modification." hearings, 04th Cong.. 2d sees., June 15-18, 1977. Washington, D.C.. U.S.
Government Frinting Office, 1976, p. 290.
219
sion users. Present fragmentation of effort, combined with subcritical support
levels, retards adequate progress toward the goal of problem resolution and de-
velopment of application capability.
I suggest that a commission-type approach be considered. This would permit
representation of various weather modification missions by researchers, users,
and the general public. Such a commission could develop a comprehensive and
coordinated national weather modification policy and program of weather modi-
fication research. ... A positive national program and funding levels could be
recommended to Congress. I believe that management of the program through
this commission for the next five to ten years should also be considered. The
highest standards possible and the broadest representation possible should be
required for this commission and its staff.
As the technological capability develops and can respond to various uses, the
lull responsibility for the respective uses could transfer to the mission agencies
at that time. Continued involvement by the agencies during the development
stages could make a smooth transition possible. If the national research and
development program is organized and managed through such a commission, the
commission should not have the dual role of regulating weather modification at
the same time it has the responsibility for its developmient.85
Changnon has recommended an almost total reorganization of the
Federal weather modification structure in order to handle better the
current major research responsibilities; evaluation efforts needed im-
mediately, which are not being addressed ; and readiness to perform re-
sponsibilities of the near future, including operations, regulation, and
compensation. He suggests twro approaches to this reorganization,
shown schematically in figure l.66
In his first approach, Changnon would place all weather modifica-
tion activities, except regulation and compensation, in one agency
(Agency X, fig. la), either a new agency or a division of one exist-
ing. From a weather modification and a user standpoint the likely can-
didates proposed among existing agencies are the U.S. Department of
Agriculture and XOAA. This primary agency would develop a na-
tional laboratory which would both conduct research and development
and also subcontract such efforts. The agency and its laboratory would
be responsible for program design, monitoring, and evaluation of all
experimental and operational projects and would report results to the
regulatory agency (Agency Y, fig. la). The laboratory would also
be responsible for Federal operational efforts and for development of
guidelines for private operators. Close interaction would be required
with the States, private business, and the public within operational
regions. Agency Y could be a new agency or an existing one, such as
the Environmental Protection Agency or XOAA. provided that NOAA
is not also chosen as Agency X. Agency Y would also develop and ad-
minister compensatory mechanisms to benefit those identified as losers
as a result of weather modification programs. This first approach would
also include a Presidential board or commission of appointed non-
Federal members with statutory responsibility for reporting annually
to the President and the Congress on all weather modification activi-
ties performed by Agencies X and Y.67
05 Ibid., pp. 290-291.
66 Changnon. Stanley A.. Jr.. "The Federal Role in Weather Modification." background
paper prepared for the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory
Board. Urbana. 111., Mar. 9. 1977, pp. 24-27.
87 Ibid., pp. 25-26.
220
221
In Changnon's second organizational approach, there are similarities
to the first, but current research activities would be retained with some
Federal agencies (see fig. lb). Agency Y would handle regulatory-
compensatory functions as in the first approach, and a Presidential
board or commission would make critical annual assessments of the
progress and activities in all agencies as well as report annually to the
President and the Congress. A major agency, new or existing, would
have direct responsibility for its own activities as well as the research
programs of other Federal agencies. Thus, existing programs of the
Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Defense and of the Na-
tional Science Foundation would continue, but under direction of
Agency X, each program directed toward specific agency missions.
Other agencies currently involved in weather modification — the De-
partments of Energy, Interior, and Transportation, and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration — would be stripped of their
programs.68
In his 1970 paper, Johnson explored some of the more plausible in-
stitutional arrangements that could be designed for Federal manage-
ment of weather modification.69 He identified the various functions
into which such management responsibilities could be divided and at-
tempted to show the optimum ways that each function might be
handled. A major point which Jolmson made then, which is still ap-
propriate today, is that the Federal institutional arrangements should
depend on the pace of the development of weather modification tech-
nology. Thus, establishment of a full-blown structure dealing with all
weather modification functions may not yet be advisable, even in 1973.
COORDINATION AND ADVISORY MECHANISMS FOR FEDERAL WEATHER
MODIFICATION PROGRAMS
Introduction
There are a number of formal and informal mechanisms by which
the Federal research program in weather modification is coordinated,
and there exist a variety of panels, committees, and organizations —
some governmental and some quasi-governmental — which provide ad-
vice and a forum for exchange of information on various aspects of
weather modification. Coordination is also achieved through profes-
sional society meetings and through workshops on specific problems
which are scheduled by Federal agencies from time to time.
Much of the coordination of weather modification projects attempted
by agency representatives consists of exchange of information on the
scope and the funding of the different agency programs, this ex-
change accomplished through meetings of committees, conferences,
and panels. Through such exchange it is expected that consensus can
be approached and coordination achieved.
Various opinions have been expressed on the degree to which Fed-
eral weather modification programs are coordinated. According to
Droessler, "The weather modification research program probably is
as well coordinated as any research effort within the Federal Govern-
68 Ibid., p. 26-27.
89 Johnson, "Federal Organization or Control of Weather Modification," 1970, pp. 131-1S0.
34-SoT— 79 17
222
ment." 70 Dr. Alfred J. Eggers, Jr., former Assistant Director for Re-
search Applications at the S"SF has recently stated that :
In summary, the current programs in weather modification of the various
agencies appear to be sufficiently well coordinated to avoid unknowing duplica-
tions of efforts, but not so rigidly coordinated as to unduly narrow the range
of scientific approaches being taken to respond to several agency missions.
Weather modification is not a well-developed technology. Given the current
state of the art, the current mechanisms of coordination appear to be appropriate
and adequate.71
A contrary view was stated in the report by the General Accounting
Office (GAO) on the need for a national program in weather modifica-
tion research :
A national program in weather modification research is necessary to effectively
control activities of the agencies involved. Although this need was recognized as
early as 1966. the organizations established to coordinate these activities have
not developed and implemented an effective overall national program. Although
coordinating groups have tried to develop national programs, their implementa-
tion has not been successful. The present fragmentation of research efforts has
made it extremely difficult for agencies to conduct effective field research which,
in the case of weather modification, must precede operational activities.72
In answer to this conclusion of the GAO report that the Federal
weather modification research program was not effectively coordi-
nated, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) replied that:
The point on ineffective coordination of research projects is not supported by
fact. Weather modification research is well coordinated by the Interdepartmen-
tal Committee on Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS). ICAS meets monthly and pro-
vides members and observers the opportunity to exchange information in a timely
manner. Interdepartmental coordination of weather modification activities has
been, in our opinion, achieved through the efforts of ICAS and the member
agencies in an exemplary manner.7''
The several means, formal and informal, by which the Federal
weather modification research program is coordinated, or by which
advice on agency programs is provided, are identified and discussed in
the following subsections.
The Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS)
The principal mechanism for coordination of Federal weather
modification programs has been the ICAS. Weather modification
has been a principal concern of the committee since its inception in
1959, and it was recently stated that the ICAS has spent more effort
dealing with weather modification than with any other single topic.74
This close tie and continued interest by the ICAS on weather modi-
fication was instilled from its beginning, when it incorporated func-
tions of an existing interagency weather modification committee.
In 195s. the National Science Foundation recognized the need for
a formal interagency coordinating mechanism as part of its newly
70 Droessler. "Weather Modification : Federal Policies, Funding From All Sources, Inter-
agency Coordination," 1!*77. p. 14.
71 Eggers, testimony before House Committee on Science and Technology, Subcommittee
on the Environment and the Atmosphere. 107(5. pp. 111-112.
- Comptroller of the United States. "Need for a National Weather Modification Research
Propnim '* report to the Congress, General Accounting Office, B-133202, Washington, D.C.,
Aug. 23. 1974, p. 23.
Sawhlll. John C. Associate Director, Office of Management and Budget. In a letter to
Morton B. Henig, Associate Director, Manpower and Welfare Division, General Accounting
Office. Sept. 12. 1973.
74 Todd. Edward P. (Chairman of the Tn t erdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sci-
ences), in testimony at hearings on weather modification before the Subcommittee on the
Environment and the Atmosphere. Committee on Science and Technologv. U S. House of
Representatives, June 16, 1976, p. 127.
223
assigned statutory responsibilities as weather modification lead agency
and established an Interdepartmental Committee on Weather Modi-
fication. A year later the newly established Federal Council for Sci-
ence and Technology (FCST) considered the need for a committee to
cover atmospheric sciences; and, upon agreement between the Presi-
dent's science adviser and the Director of the XSF, the existing Inter-
departmental Committee on Weather Modification was formally
reconstituted as the FCST's Interdepartmental Committee for At-
mospheric Sciences. ICAS held its first meeting September 9, 1959. 75> 76
The National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and
Priorities Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-282) was^ signed May 11, 1976,
creating the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering,
and Technology (FCCSET) . Under the new law, the ICAS, a subcom-
mittee of the former FCST. should have ceased to function, since
the parent council was abolished. Prior to the signing of Public Law
94-282, however, the FCST Chairman addressed a letter to all FCST
subcommittee chairmen, indicating that these committees should con-
tinue their normal activities until such time as a new organizational
structure for FCCSET could be established and begin to function.
Subsequently, the FCCSET established several supporting subcom-
mittees, one of which is the Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere
(CAO) . The ICAS was formally adopted by the CAO on a temporary
basis, pending creation of its own subcommittee structure. Conse-
quently, the ICAS lias continued to hold meetings and published its
customary annual report, under authority given by the Chairman of
the CAO.77 Although the future of the ICAS is uncertain, a recent
survey indicated that its members favored continuation of an *'ICAS-
like'? activity. The committee thus intends to meet and conduct business,
at a reduced level of activity, until the CAO organization becomes firm
and is in full operation.78
The coordination activities of the ICAS for the Federal weather
modification research program has been particularly valuable, espe-
cially since 1968, when the Xational Science Foundation was relieved
of its lead agency role. Prior to that time the XSF had provided leader-
ship to the Federal program in a number of ways. Beginning in 1969
the ICAS has continued the sponsorship of the annual Interagency
Conference on Weather Modification, which the XSF had initiated 10
years earlier. This annual conference is a "partial mechanism to pro-
mote effective communications and a source of shared responsibility
among the Washington program managers and the field program
managers." 79 These conferences provide a forum for exchanging in-
75 Special Commission on Weather Modification. '"Weather and Climate Modification," re-
port to the National Science Foundation. XSF 66-3, Washington. D.C.. Dec. 20. 1965, p. 131.
76 A discussion of the history and activities of the Federal Council for Science and Tech-
nology is found in the following report: Bates. Dorothy M. (coordinator). Interagency Co-
ordination of Federal Scientific Research and Development : The Federal Council for Sci-
ence and Technology. Report prepared by the Science Policy Research Division of the Con-
gressional Research Service for the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Scientific
Planning and Analysis. Committee on Science and Technology. U.S. House of Representa-
tives. Committee Print. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976. 447 pp. Of spe-
cial interest in this report is a case history of the ICAS: Morrison. Robert E. The Inter-
departmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences : a case history. App. Ln pp. 381-396.
(Included in the case history is a list of ICAS publications through July 1976.)
" Federal Coordinating Council for Science. Engineering, and Technology. Committee on
Oceans and Atmosphere. Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences. National
Atmospheric Sciences Program : fiscal year 1978. ICAS 21-FY7S. September 1977, 96 pp.
7S Ibid., p. iii.
"9 Drossier. Weather Modification: Federal Policies. Funding From All Sources Inter-
agency Coordination, p. 14.
224
formation on progress in past years, plans for the coming year,
thoughts on future projects, and suggestions on solutions to various
problems encountered. The annual conferences, under ICAS sponsor-
ship, beginning with the 11th in 1969, have been hosted, at the request
of the ICAS, by the NSF and by NOAA. The NSF hosted the 11th
conference, and XOAA has hosted all of those since, starting with
the 12th.
At regular meetings of the ICAS, major weather modification pro-
grams of member agencies are frequently reviewed through project
briefings by Washington and field program managers. The ICAS has
formed standing and ad hoc panels to which are assigned responsibili-
ties for specific facets of the weather modificaion program. Panels in
the past have worked on problems such as legislation on weather modi-
fication, a national plan for the Federal weather modification program,
and a plan for accelerating progress in weather modification. These
panels address topics as requested by the parent committee and make
recommendations to the ICAS for actions as required. Two specific
ICAS reports have dealt with the subject.80' 81
Besides formal coordination afforded by the annual conferences, dis-
cussions at ICAS meetings, and studies undertaken by ICAS panels,
there is also included an account of the Federal weather modification
program as an appendix to the annual ICAS report.82 In the early
years of the ICAS member agencies reported their funding for the
general support of atmospheric sciences only in two broad categories,
meteorology and aeronomy. Beginning with fiscal year 1963 the agen-
cies began to identify specific funds for weather modification, and this
information has been included since in the annual ICAS report along
with brief descriptions of member agency programs.
It was at the request of the ICAS and with the cooperation of the
Secretary of Commerce that Federal agencies began to report their
weather modification research activities to XOAA as of November 1,
1973.83 Public Law 92-205 requires such reporting by all nonfederal!}'
sponsored weather modification projects in the United States and its
territories.84 This voluntary reporting by Federal agencies, initiated
by the ICAS, thus assured that the central source of information on
weather modification projects in the United States is reasonably
complete.
In its 1971 annual report, the ICAS identified selected major re-
search projects in weather modification which were designated as na-
tional projects.85 These national projects were formulated by the
ICAS members through combination of agency projects in each of
seven categories of weather modification assigning lead agency respon-
sibilities in most cases to that agency with the most significant ongoing
80 Newell. Homer E. A recommended national program in weather modification. Federal
Council for Science and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sci-
ences ICAS report No. 10a. Washington. D.C., November 1966. 93 pp.
81 Federal Council for Science and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. ICAS report No. 15a. Washington. D.C., June 1971, 50 pp.
82 The most recent account is found in the latest ICAS annual report : Federal Coordinat-
ing Council for Science. Engineering, and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for
Atmospheric Sciences. ICAS 21-FY7S. Pp. 87-94.
83 Federal Council for Science and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. National Atmospheric Sciences Program : fiscal rear 1975. ICAS 18-FY 75
Washington, DC. May 1974. n. iv.
M See earlier discussions on Public Law 92 205 under congressional activities, p. 197. and
under tbe administration of the reporting program by NOAA. p. 2'.V2.
Federal Council for Science and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. National Atmospheric Sciences Program : fiscal year 1972. ICAS report
No. 15. March 1971, pp. 5-6.
225
project (s) within each category. The proposed national projects and
respective lead agencies were :
1. National Colorado River Basin pilot project. — Bureau of Recla-
mation, Department of the Interior : To test the feasibility of apply-
ing a cloud seeding technology, proven effective under certain condi-
tions, to a river basin for a winter season to augment the seasonal
snowpack.
'2. National hurricane modification project. — National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce : To develop
a seeding technology and associated mathematical models to reduce
the maximum surface winds associated with hurricanes.
3. National lightning suppression project. — Forest Service, Depart-
ment of Agriculture : To develop a seeding technology and associated
physical and mathematical models to reduce the frequency of forest
fire-starting lightning strokes from cumulonimbus clouds.
4. National cumulus modification project. — National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce : To develop
a seeding technology and associated mathematical models to promote
the growth of cumulus clouds in order to increase the resulting natural
rainfall in areas where needed.
5. National hail research experiment. — National Science Founda-
tion : To develop a seeding technology and associated mathematical
models to reduce the incidence of damaging hailfall from cumulonim-
bus clouds without adversely affecting the associated rainfall.
6. National Great Lakes snoio redistribution project. — National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce :
To develop a seeding technology and associated mathematical models
to spread the heavy snowfall of the Great Lakes coastal region farther
inland.
7. National fog modification project. — Federal Aviation Adminis-
tration, Department of Transportation : To develop seeding or other
technology and associated physical and mathematical models to reduce
the visibility restrictions imposed by warm and cold fogs where and to
the extent needed.86
Although most of these national projects were continued for at least
a while, some of them failed to materialize, as hoped, as truly national
projects. Few received the expected interagency support and planning
effort envisioned; however, in spite of these deficiencies, some were
pursued by the lead agencies, largely as major single-agency projects.
The National Hail Research Experiment, conducted by the National
Science Foundation perhaps came closest to a truly national project
and. with assistance from other Federal agencies, continued through
1976. 87 A critique of the national projects in weather modification was
included in the 1974 report of the General Accounting Office on the
need for a national program in weather modification research.88
In answer to charges that the Federal weather modification research
effort has been poorly coordinated, a conclusion of various studies that
have been made, the Chairman of the ICAS recently said, "Within the
IOAS we have considered coordination as it is defined, namely, har-
» Ibid.
Shc discussion of the national bail research project under following section on the pro-
gram of the National Science Foundation, p. 274 ff.
^Comptroller General of the United States. Need for a national weather modification
research program. B-133202, 1974. Pp. 16-22.
226
monious action, communication within Government. I submit that,,
using that definition, the weather modification research program is
probably as well coordinated as any effort within the Government, with
the possible exception of programs that are entirely within the purview
of a single agency. The critics of the ICAS coordination effort, how-
ever, seem to nave been interpreting coordination as including manage-
ment ; the ICAS is not a management agent.'' 89
The National Academy of Sciences/ Committee on Atmospheric Sci-
ences (N AS/GAS)
Advice has been provided to the Federal Government through ad-
visory panels, intensive studies, and published reports on weather
modification, by the National Academy of Sciences. The Committee
on Atmospheric Sciences (CAS) was organized under the National
Research Council of the Academy in 1956, with the stated purpose of
addressing . . itself to the task of viewing in broad perspective the
present activities in research and education, the exchange of informa-
tion and related matters as they affect the status of the field and future
progress toward a balanced national program in the atmospheric
sciences, and participation in international programs." 90
At the request of, and sponsored by, the National Science Founda-
tion, a conference was organized and conducted by the NAS in 1959,
in which meteorologists, mathematicians, and statisticians met to ex-
amine needs in weather modification experiments. The report on this
Skyline Conference on the Design and Conduct of Experiments in
Weather Modification,91 which had been held in the Shenandoah Na-
tional Park in Virginia, made a strong plea for careful statistical
design of weather modification experiments, pointing out the need for
long-term programs, standardization of design, the need for basic
research in cloud physics, and the requirement for cooperation between
meteorologists and statisticians.
In March 1963, the CAS appointed a Panel on Weather and Climate
Modification, "to undertake a deliberate and thoughtful review of the
present status and activities in this field and of its potential and limi-
tations in the future." 92 The Panel was chaired by Dr. Gordon J. F.
MacDonald and was comprised of 11 Government and non-Govern-
ment members. The Academy Panel worked closely with the NSF's
Special Commission on Weather Modification, which had been estab-
Lished in 1964. Three reports were subsequently published by the Panel,,
based on in-depth studies which had been undertaken.
The first of these, "Scientific Problems of Weather Modification,"
appeared in 1964; 03 the second, "Weather and Climate Modification:
Problems and Prospects," was published in 1966; 94 and the third,
89 Todd. Testimony before House Committee on Science and Technology, Subcommittee on
the Environment and the Atmosphere. June 197fi. p. S7.
90 National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering. Institute of Medicine;
National Research Council. Organization and members: 1975-1976. Washington, D.C. Octo-
ber 1975. P. 81.
n National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council. Report of the Skyline Con-
ference on the Design ami Conduct of Experiments in Weather Modification. NAS— NBC Pub-
lication 742. Washington. D.C, l!tn'). 24 pp.
92 National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council. Committee on Atmospheric
Sciences. Weather and Climate Modification: Problems and Prospects. Volume I. summary
and recommendations. Final report of the Panel on Weather and Climate Modification. Pub-
lication No. 1350, Washington, D.C, I960, p. vii.
m National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council. Committee on Atmospheric
Sciences Scientific Problems of Weather Modification : a Report of the Panel on Weather
and Climate Modification. NAS NRC Publication No. 1236. Washington. D.C. 1964. 56 pp.
ot National Academy of Sciences. Publication No. 1350. 1906. In two volumes. 40 + 212 pp.
227
"Weather Modification : Problems and Progress," came out in 1973.95
In addition to the reports produced by the panel, two other National
Academy studies were conducted in the 1970's which, in part, addressed
aspects of weather modification. The Committee on Atmospheric Sci-
ences surveyed the field in a chapter in its 1971 publication, "The
Atmospheric Sciences and Man's Needs ; Priorities for the Future." 96
In 1976 a report was prepared by the Committee on Climate and
Weather Fluctuations and Agricultural Production of the Board on
Agriculture and Eenewable Resources. A full chapter is devoted to
weather modification in this report, entitled "Climate and Food;
Climatic Fluctuation and U.S. Agricultural Production." 97
Project Stormfury, a major hurricane modification project of the
Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin-
istration (NO A A), 98 from its inception has had an advisory panel
composed of prominent scientists, primarily meteorologists. Currently,
the panel is appointed by and operates under the auspices of the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences, Committee on Atmospheric Sciences.
Members of the Stomfurv Advisory Panel all come from either the
academic community or from private industry. Not only does the Panel
review program results and experimental designs and make recom-
mendations, but it also conducts periodic scientific symposia before
larger groups. A recent program review was held in September 1977,
and a report on the review is in preparation.
The National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere
(NAG OA)
This advisory committee was created by Public Law 92-125 on
August 16, 1971, and was to be advisory to both the President and the
Congress on the Nation's atmospheric and marine affairs and to the
Secretary of Commerce with respect to the programs of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Among other
duties, the committee was charged with assessing the status of U.S.
atmospheric and oceanic activities and with submitting an annual re-
port of its findings and recommendations to the President and the
Congress. The Secretary of Commerce was also required, on behalf of
the executive branch, to prepare comments on the NACOA recom-
mendations. These comments are appended to each of the annual
NACOA reports.
As originally constituted by Public Law 95-125, NACOA included
25 members, all non-Federal, appointed by the President, who also'
designated one of the members as chairman and one as vice chairman.
Each department and agency of the Federal Government concerned
with atmospheric and marine matters was to designate a senior policy
official to participate as observer and to offer assistance as required.
The Secretary of Commerce was to make available such staff, person -
95 National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council. Committee on Atmospheric
Science^ Weather Modification : Problems and Progress. ISBN 0-309-02121-9. Washing-
ton, D.C., 1973. 280 pp.
98 National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council. Committee on Atmospheric
£c.V^ce^T£e.Atmospheric Sciences and Man's Needs; Priorities for the Future. ISBN
0-300-01912-5. Washington, D.C., May 1971, pp. 42-61.
97 National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council. Board on Agriculture and
Renewable Resources. Climate and Food ; Climatic Fluctuation and U.S. Agricultural Pro-
duction. ISBN O-309-02522-2. Washington, D.C.. 1976 pp. 131-162
ps For discussion of Project Stormfury, see p. 296 under weather modification pro-rams
Of the Department of Commerce.
228
nel, information, and administrative services as reasonably required
to carry out committee activities. The life of NACOA was extended
and its appropriation authorization was increased successively by
Public Laws 92-657 and 94-69 of October 25, 1972, and August 16,
1975, respectively. The 1971 act was repealed, however, by Public Law
95-63, of July 5, 1977, which effectively disbanded the previous com-
mittee and established a new NACOA. Although many of the provi-
sions of the new law were similar to the previous one, the size of the
committee was reduced from 25 to 18 members, appointed by the
President .with the stipulation that members must be eminently quali-
fied in knowledge and expertise in areas of direct concern to the com-
mittee, that is, in atmospheric- and marine-oriented disciplines.
Since its inception, the posture of NACOA has been to concentrate
its studies on those important issues where it can make a significant
contribution, recognizing that an attempt to review and evaluate every
program and issue within its purview of responsibility could result
in treating none of them well and could possibly duplicate what others
are capable of doing better." Among other important topics, weather
modification has been the subject of examination, deliberation, and
comment often throughout the 6 years of NACOA's existence.
Each of the six NACOA annual reports have contained discussion
and recommendations on weather modification, which was one of the
four major topics covered extensively in the first annual report.1
NACOA's repeated position has been that there is a need for "a coordi-
nated Federal effort to support the basic research needed to bring
weather modification to the point of being an operational tool resting
on a sound technical base" but that "major gaps remain, largely be-
cause no one agency has the responsibility for identifying and support-
ing those areas of basic study needed for further progress along a
broad front." 2 Specific recommendations of NACOA on the Federal
weather modification program will be discussed in the following chap-
ter of this report on studies and recommendations.3
Other coordination and advisory mechanisms
Although overall coordination of the Federal weather modification
programs has been an ICAS responsibility, there are other panels
which assist certain agencies in connection with major research proj-
ects, and there have been various workshops on particular problem
areas through which interagency consensus has been achieved. The
NSF Weather Modification Advisory Panel has provided important
guidance to the weather modification research activities of the NSF.
The presence of representatives from both the Bureau of Reclamation
and NOAA, the other agencies with major weather modification pro-
grams, was designed to assure a high level of coordination. The
National Hail Research Experiment (NHRE) Advisory Panel of
the NSF also has had representatives from these two agencies.
Research proposals received by the NSF are reviewed by the Bureau
National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere. A report to the President nnd
the Poncrres^. First annual report. June 30. 1972. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government
Printing Office, p. iv.
1 Ibid., pp. 19-29.
: National Advisory Committee on Oceans nnd Atmosphere, a report to the President and
tt <■ I !ongre88. sixth annual report. June 30, 1977, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Print-
lng Office, p. 76.
See Ch. 6.
229
of Reclamation and by NOAA, thus giving a direct input to these
agencies in the decision process as to whether individual research pro-
posals are to be funded by the NSF.4
The agencies coordinate directly with each other at the working
level whenever the respective programs may benefit thereby. A close
coordination mechanism was established, for example, between the
National Hail Research Experiment (NHRE) of the NSF and the Bu-
reau of Reclamation's High Plains Cooperative Program (HIPLEX) ,
a useful and practical arrangement in view of the geographical prox-
imity of the two projects in northeastern Colorado and northwestern
Kansas, respectively.5
During the past few years workshops on various aspects and prob-
lem areas in weather modification have afforded additional oppor-
tunity for coordination. In 1975 the National Science Foundation spon-
sored a symposium/workshop on the suppression of hail as part of its
National Hail Research Experiment.6 The NSF also sponsored a major
workshop on inadvertent weather modification at Hartford, Conn., in
May 1977.7 Another recent workshop sponsored by the NSF was
held in August 1977 at Fort Collins. Colo., on extended space and time
effects of planned weather modification activities.8
Since 1967, the Bureau of Reclamation has conducted nine con-
ferences as part of its "Project Sky water." dealing with various special
topics of particular concern to the projects and to planned weather
modification in general. Some of these Sky water conferences have been
jointly sponsored with other agencies, in particular, the National
Science Foundation, and more recent conferences have been conducted
in a workshop format. Following each conference proceedings have
been published. The first conference was held at Denver, Colo., in 1967,
on the subject of physics and chemistry of nucleation.9 The most recent
conference was a workshop, held in November 1976, at Vail, Colo.,
on environmental aspects of precipitation management.10 One day of
this conference was sponsored jointly with the National Science Foun-
dation. A tenth Skywater Conference is a workshop scheduled for
June 1978, at Lake Tahoe, Calif., where the topic will be the Sierra
Cooperative Pilot Project of Skywater. This conference will follow a
meeting at the same place, sponsored jointly by the American Meteoro-
logical Society and the Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agri-
culture, on Sierra Nevada mountain meteorology.
Also of interest as a coordination mechanism was the November
1975, Special Regional Weather Modification Conference on Augmen-
4 Eggers. testimony before House Committee on Science and Technology, Subcommittee on
the Environment and the Atmosphere, 1976, p. 110.
5 Ibid., p. 111.
6 National Center for Atmospheric Research, NHRE symposium/workshop on hail and its
suppression, working group reports. Estes Park. Colo.. Sept. 21-28. 1976. "National Hail
Research Experiment." technical report NCAR/7100-75/2, November 1975, 130 pp.
7 Robinson. G. D. (Principal Investigator), inadvertent weather modification workshop.
May 23-27, 1977. Hartford. Conn., final report to the National Science Foundation, under
grant No. ENV-77-10186. "Hartford, the Center for the Environment and Man. Inc.."
November 1977. CEM Report 4215-604. 167 pp.
s Brown. R>ith J.. Robert D. Elliott, and Max Edelstein (editors). "Transactions of
Workshop on Extended Space and Time Effects of Weather Modification." Aug. 8-12, 1977,
Fort Collins. Colo. Goleta, Calif., North American weather consultants, February 1978
(draft), 279 pp.
9 U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. "Phvsics and Cbpmistrv of
Nucleation." proceedings ; Skywater Conference I, Denver. Colo., July 10-12, 1967, Denver.
July 1967. 419 pp.
10 U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. "Precipitation. Man. and the
Environment ; an Overview of Skywatpr IX Conference," second week of November 1976,
Vail, Colo., Denver, September 1977, 223 pp.
r
230
tation of Winter Orographic Precipitation in the Western United
States, sponsored jointly by the American Meteorological Society, the
Department of Water Resources of the State of California, the
Weather Modification Association, and the Bureau of Reclamation.11
In connection with Project Sky water, the Bureau of Reclamation
has established a number of advisory boards and panels from time to
time as the need has arisen. These groups have been composed of both
Government and non-Government experts. In connection with the
High Plains Cooperative Project (HIPLEX) , the Bureau of Reclama-
tion has also established citizens* panels to advise on local problems;
these groups have included local government officials among other indi-
viduals. Similar local advisory groups have been planned for the Sierra
Cooperative Pilot Project and are now being organized.
Another means of coordination is provided through the joint spon-
sorship of some Federal research efforts. For example, the weather
modification simulation laboratory at the Colorado State University,
funded through the National Science Foundation by three Federal
agencies, is a facility used in support of a number of Federal projects.
The National Science Foundation has funded a number of research
studies which support the major weather modification programs of
other agencies, particularly those of the Bureau of Reclamation and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
A coordination and advisory role has also been played from time to
time by the committees and panels which have been established to con-
duct major weather modification policy studies. Notable among these
groups are the Advisory Committee on Weather Control, established
by Congress in 1953, and the Weather Modification Advisory Board,
impaneled by the Secretarv of Commerce to implement requirements
of the National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976.12
Although not officially sponsored by the Federal Government, a
forum for coordination and exchange of information on Federal as
well as non-Federal programs is provided through the meetings and
the journals of professional organizations. The American Meteorologi-
cal Society (AMS) has sponsored six conferences specifically dealing
with weather modification, at which the majority of the papers de-
livered have been related to Federal research projects and at which
nearly all of the papers have been based on federally sponsored re-
search. Exchange of information on Federal projects has also been
afforded through the medium of AMS journals, particularly the "Bul-
letin of the American Meteorology Society" and the "Journal of
Applied Meteorology." Among the various specialized AMS commit-
tees is the Committee on Weather Modification, concerned with ad-
vances and priorities in weather modification research, the greatest
portion of which is supported in the United States by the Federal
agencies. In addition, specialized conferences on some problem aspects
of weather modification have been sponsored by the AMS, sometimes
jointly with various Federal agencies.
" American Meteorological Society, Abstracts of Special Regional Weather Modification
Conference: Augmentation of Winter Orographic Precipitation in the Western United
States Nov 11 13, 1975, San Francisco, Calif. (Cosponsored by the U.S. Department
Of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation; State of California, Department of Water Re-
potirccs ; and the Weather Modification Association, Boston (no publication date), 24H nn.
12 The purpose, formation, activities, and recommendations of these committees are dis-
eussed in some detail in various other places in this report.
231
The Weather Modification Association (WMA) sj^onsors two pro-
fessional meetings each year, sometimes jointly with the AMS or other
professional organizations, and also published the "Journal of
Weather Modification/' These WMA mechanisms provide additional
opportunities for coordination of Federal projects as information is
exchanged among participants, many of whom are employees of Fed-
eral agencies or of contractors on Federal projects. The organization,
purposes, and activities of the AMS, the WMA, and other nongov-
ernmental organizations concerned with weather modification are dis-
cussed under the section on private organizations in chapter 8 of this
report.13
Weather Modification Ad visory Board
The National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976, Public Law
91-490 of October 13, 1976, requires that the Secretary of Commerce
"shall conduct a comprehensive investigation and study of the state of
scientific knowledge concerning weather modification, the present state
of development of weather modification technology, the problems im-
peding eli'ective implementation of weather modification technology,
and other related matters" ; and that "the Secretary shall prepare and
submit to the President and the Congress * * * a final report on the
findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the study."' 14
The Secretary of Commerce responded to these requirements by
appointing an 18-member non-Federal Weather Modification Advisory
Board to conduct the study and prepare a report recommending a na-
tional weather modification policy and a national program of research
and action to carry out the policy. Members of the Advisory Board,
with their affiliations, and the charter to the Board from the Secretary
are included in appendix K. The Board's final draft report is to be
submitted to the Secretary for her approval and any necessary modifi-
cations, after which it will be transmitted to the President and the
Congress.
Owing to the 1976 Presidential election and change of administra-
tion in January 1977. and because of procedures required by the Fed-
eral Advisory Committee Act. the Advisory Board was not officially
appointed until April 1977. Consequently, much of the 1-year allotted
time for the study had been lost and it was apparent that the report
could not be completed by October 13, 1977, as required by Public Law
94-490. An extension of time, requested by the Secretary, was trans-
mitted to both houses of the Congress, and a bill providing for such an
extension was introduced in the Senate,15 but no action has been taken
to date, and formal action by the Congress to extend the time for com-
pletion of the study seems unlikely. Meanwhile, the Advisory Board
continued its study and report development, planning to deliver its
report to the Secretary of Commerce by June 30, 1978. Following
public hearings and receipt of comments from other executive branch
agencies, it is anticipated that the Secretary will transmit the docu-
ment to the Congress in the late summer or fall of 1978. 16
u SpP d. 389.
14 Public Law 94-490. Sees. 4 and 5. (The complete text of the law is included in app. I.)
»S. 1938, introduced Jnly 27. 1077. by Sen. Warren G. Masrnuson.
18 This tentative schedule for completion and transmittal of the report is based on dis-
cussions by the Weather Modification Advisory Board at its ninth meeting. Apr. 4, 197S, in
Washington. D.C.
232
The Advisory Board has met formally four times in Washington,
D.C., and one time each in North Forks, N. Dak.; Boulder, Colo.;
Champaign, 111.; San Francisco, Calif.; Chicago, 111.; Tulsa, Okla. ;
Atlanta, Ga. ; and Aspen, Colo. — combining public hearings with
working sessions. Subpanels and other ad hoc groups of Board
members have also met numerous times to work on specific aspects of
the study and to prepare draft sections of the report. At a hearing on
October 26, 1977, the Chairman of the Advisory Board, Harlan
Cleveland, briefed the Subcommittee on the Environment and the
Atmosphere of the House Committee on Science and Technology, re-
lating activities to date of the Board and submitting for the record a
discussion paper which summarized the Board's thinking at the time.17
WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES REPORTING PROGRAM
Background and regulations
Public Law 92-205 of December 18, 1971,18 requires reporting
of basic information on all nonfederally sponsored weather modifica-
tion activities in the United States and its territories to the Secretary
of Commerce. The Secretary is further directed to maintain a record
of weather modification activities taking place in the United States
and to publish summaries of such information "from time to time."
Within the Commerce Department the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has administered this pro-
gram on behalf of the Secretary. Rules for carrying out the provisions
of this legislation, published in the Federal Register,19 went into effect
on November 1, 1972. The rules have since been revised and amended
twice — on February 15, 1974,20 to cover safety and environmental
aspects of field activities and to consider possible interference with
Federal research projects, and again on July 4, 1976,21 to modify cer-
tain reporting procedures. A copy of the rules and regulations cur-
rently in effect appears in appendix L. In the same appendix are
copies of the forms and specific reporting instructions to be used for
submission of required information to NOAA by weather modifica-
tion operators.
Reporting requirements include initial, interim, and final reports.
It is required that NOAA receive the initial report at least 10 days
prior to the commencement of weather modification activities. The
rules provide for exceptions whereby this 10-day rule may be waived
under certain emergencies and also require filing a supplemental report
if the initial report is subsequently found to contain inaccuracies, mis-
statements, or omissions or if project plans are changed. The interim
report is required January 1 of each year (October 1 prior to the 1976
revision of the rules) unless the project has been terminated prior to
that date. Upon completion of the project, a final report is due, and,
17 Weather Modification Advisory P,oard. "A U.S. Policy To Enhance the Atmospheric
Environment," a discussion paper. Oct. 21. 1977, 29 pp. (Also appeared In record of
hearing: TVS. Congress. House of Representatives. Committee on Science and Technology,
Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere. Weather Modification. 95th
Cong., 1st sess. Oct. 21, 1977, pp. 20-49.
18 See appendix I for a reproduction of Public Law 92-205 and see earlier section of this
chapter under congressional activities for discussion of enactment of this law and those
enacted since which have extended appropriations authorization through fiscal year 1980.
19 Federal Register, vol. 37. No. 208. Friday, Oct. 27. 1972.
^Federal Register, vol. 39, No. 10, Tuesday. Jan. 15, 1974.
21 Federal Register, vol. 41. No. 113. June 10, 1976.
233
until such final report is received by XOAA, the project is considered
active.22
Reporting of Federal activities
Although not required to do so by Public Law 92-205, as of Novem-
ber 1, 1973, Federal agencies also began reporting to NOAA their
experimental activities in weather modification. This procedure re-
sulted from an agreement obtained by the Secretary of Commerce
from the responsible agencies at the request of the Interdepartmental
Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS) and the Office of Man-
agement and Budget. Reporting guidelines adopted for Federal
agencies are similar to those for non-Federal projects, using the same
data forms; however, Federal entities and employees thereof are ex-
cepted from criminal penalty to which other operators are subject for
noncompliance, and no Federal agency is required to furnish infor-
mation or material whose protection is in the interest of national
security. With similar reporting of federally and nonfederally spon-
sored activities, there now exists a central source of information on all
weather modification projects in the United States.23
Summary reports on U.S. weather modification activities
Since the Secretary of Commerce was given responsibility for col-
lecting information on weather modification activities and for pub-
lishing "from time to time" summaries of this information, four such
summary reports have been prepared by the Environmental Modifica-
tion Office of NOAA's Office of Environmental Monitoring and Pre-
diction. The first summary covered reported projects which were active
some time between November 1, 1972, and March 22, 1973.24 The second
report incorporated information published in the first summary and
extended the period of coverage to include activities reported through
December 1973. 25 Subsequent reports summarized information on
ongoing weather modification projects underway during calendar years
1974 26 and 1975,27 respectively. The latter two summaries include
information on Federal as well as non-Federal projects for the com-
plete calendar years.
An analysis of the weather modification activities conducted in the
United States during calendar year 1975 and a preliminary analysis
of activities during calendar years 1976 and 1977 are found in chap-
ter 7 of this report. These discussions are based upon the latest weather
modification summary report published by NOAA 28 and a prelimi-
nary report on the latter 2 years prepared by Charak.29
- Charak, Mason T.. "Weather Modification Activity Reports : Calendar Year 1975." Na-
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Environmental Monitoring and
Prediction, Rockville. Md., June 1976, pp. 3 and 60.
23 Charak, Mason T. and Mary T. DiGiulian, "Weather Modification Activity Reports ;
Nov. 1, 1972, to Dec. 31, 1973." National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Office of Environmental Monitoring and Prediction, Rockville, Md.. March 1974, pp.
1 and D-l.
24 Charak, Mason T. and Mary T. DiGiulian, "Weather Modification Activity Reports ;
November 1. 1972. to March 22. 1973.'' National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Office of Environmental Monitoring and Prediction. Rockville, Md.. March 1973. 23 pp.
25 Charak and DiGiulian. "Weather Modification Activity Reports ; Nov. 1, 1972 to
Dec. 31, 1973," 1974. 40 pp.
26 Charak. Mason T., "Weather Modification Activity Reports ; Calendar Tear 1974." Na-
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Environmental Monitoring and
Production, Rockville, Md. March 1975, 37 pp.
^Charak, "Weather Modification Activity Reports; Calendar Year 1975." June 1976,
64 pp.
25 Ibid.
29 Charak. Mason T.. "Preliminary Analvsis of Reported Weather Modification Activities
In the U.S. for CY 1976 and 1977." (Submitted for publication in the Journal of Weather
Modification, 1978.)
234
It should also be noted that, as part of its responsibilities as lead
agency- for weather modification under Public Law 85-510, the Na-
tional Science Foundation (NSF) began collecting reports on weather
modification activities on a regular basis in 1966. Two years later, how-
ever, Public Law 90-407 repealed the powers of the NSF to require
such reporting. During those 2 years, the Foundation published sum-
maries of reported activities for fiscal years 1967 and 1968, which were
included in the 9th and 10th annual NSF weather modification re-
ports that were submitted to the President and the Congress.30 From
September 1, 196S, until December 18, 1971, when Public Law 92-205
was enacted, no Federal department or agency was authorized to col-
lect reports on weather modification activities. During this interim,
pertinent information on weather modification activities of the Fed-
eral Government and on the status of Aveather modification research
and technology was published in three weather modification summary
reports, published at the request of the ICAS by NOAA.31 This brief
series ended with the report which covered fiscal year 1973 ; however,
some of the kinds of information contained in these reports will be
included in the NOAA summary reports on weather modification
activities ; such material was first so included in the summary for cal-
endar year 1975.32
FEDERAL STUDIES AND REPORTS OX WEATHER MODIFICATION
Introduction
In accordance with the mandates of several public laws, or self-
initiated by the agencies or interagency committees, the executive
branch of the Federal Government lias undertaken a number of major
studies over the past 25 years on weather modification policy and/or
recommended programs for research and development. Some of these
studies have been performed under contract, others have been con-
ducted by committees of Federal employees, while a third group were
carried out by Federal committees or panels composed of non-Govern-
ment experts. Each of the completed major studies was followed by a
report which included findings and recommendations.
The earliest studies were conducted in the early 1950's, largely at the
instigation of the Department of Defense, at that time the agency with
the major Federal role in weather modification. The most significant
study and report of the 1950's was that of the Advisory Committee on
Weather Control, directed by Public Law 83-256. There was an un-
usually large number of major studies conducted and reports issued
during the period from 1965 through 1976. The reports included two
from the National Academy of Sciences, two from the Interdepart-
80 National Science Foundation. "Weather Modification : Ninth Annual Report for Fiscal
Fear Ended June HO, 1967." NSF 68-21. Aug 28. 1968. Washington. D.C.. U.S. Govt. Print.
Off., Aug. 28, 1968, pp. 75-77 : and . "Weather Modification ; Tenth Annual Report
for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 196S," NSF 69-18, Washington. D.C., U.S. Govt. Print.
Off.. Aug. 1969, pp. 111-115.
31 U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
"Summary Report: Weather Modification ; Fiscal Years 1969. 1970. 1971." Office of the
Assistant Administrator for Environmental Modification. Rockville, Md.. May 1973. 163 pp. :
. "Summary Report : Weather Modification ; Fiscal Year 1972." Office of Environmen-
tal Monitoring and Prediction, Rockville. Md., November 1973. 226 pp. : and . "Sum-
mary Report : Weather Modification ; Fiscal Year 1973." Office of Environmental Monitor-
ing and Prediction. Rockville. Md.. December 1974. 155 pp.
32Cbarak, "Weather Modification Activity Reports ; Calendar Year 1975," June 1976, pp.
37-54.
235
mental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS), three from the
National Science Foundation, and at least one each from the Depart-
ment of Agriculture, the Environmental Science Services Administra-
tion (predecessor of XOAA), and the Domestic Council's Subcom-
mittee on Climate Change. In 1966 alone, at least five reports on
federally sponsored weather modification studies appeared. The Na-
tional Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA)
has also issued policy statements on weather modification in each of its
six annual reports to date.
The most recent major study was undertaken in 1977 by the Weather
Modification Advisory Board under the auspices of the Department of
Commerce, which has been directed to conduct such a policy study and
to submit a report to the Congress in accordance with the National
Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-490).
The principal weather modification studies and reports, sponsored
by the executive branch are discussed very briefly in the following sub-
sections.33 The conclusions and recommendations of the major policy
studies are discussed and summarized in a separate chapter of this
report.34
Studies of the early 1950' s
In 1950, there were controversies among scientists over the validity
of reported results from weather modification experiments, notably
Project Cirrus, a Defense Department project, conducted primarly by
the General Electric Company under contract.35 It was agreed by those
involved that there should be an independent scientific review of the
work and the claims of spectacular results. The appointed review com-
mittee was organized under the jurisdiction of the Department of
Defense, since Project Cirrus was sponsored by that Department, with
Dr. Bernard Haurwitz of New York University as chairman. The
committee was to investigate results and report to the Defense Depart-
ment; however, when the report was submitted in the late spring of
1950, it was classified "confidential," to the dismay of committee mem-
bers, since it had been hoped that the report would explain the real
prospects of weather modification to the public.36 According to Byers,
the Defense Department finally agreed to let the report be published
by the American Meteorological Society, and it appeared "in the guise
of a report requested by the president of the Society." 37- 38 The overall
tenor of the report was one of skepticism toward the claims of success
for Project Cirrus, and the concluding paragraph of the report stated
that :
It is the considered opinion of this committee that the possibility of artificially
producing any useful amounts of rain has not been demonstrated so far if the
available evidence is interpreted by any acceptable scientific standards.38
In view of the potential value of weather modification techniques and
the controversial results obtained thus far, the research agencies of the
33 Studies and reports of the congressional support agencies have been noted earlier in
this chapter under the discussion of congressional weather modification activities. See
p. 209.
34 See chap. 6, p. 313 ff.
85 For a discussion of Project Cirrus, see p. 39, under the history of weather modification
in chapter 2.
36 Byers, Horace W., "History of Weather Modification," In Wilmot H. Hess (editor).
Weather and Climate Modification. New York, Wiley, 1974, pp. 33-34.
37 Ibid., p. 34.
38 The report appeared under correspondence, signed by members of the committee, in the
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol. 31, No. 9, November 1950. pp. 346-347
39 Ibid . p. 347.
236
U.S. Army, Navy, and Air Force, along with the U.S. Weather Bureau,
in 1951 appointed an Artificial Cloud Nucleation Advisory Group,
chaired by Dr. Sverre Petterssen of the University of Chicago. The
Advisory Group was asked to make a survey of the field of weather
modification and u. . . to recommend a program for experiments and
tests that could be expected to clarify major uncertainties that existed
at that time for the operational uses of weather modification tech-
niques." The Advisory Group found some support for the claims of
Langmuir that seeding had affected larger atmospheric systems, but
emphasized the need for clarification experiments. The group con-
cluded that there was good evidence to indicate that cold stratus (and
presumably cold fog) could be dispelled by nucleation. It had not been
possible in any case to predict what results would have occurred if
seeding had not been performed, indicating the need for more rigorous
control of future tests. The Advisory Group consulted a number of
experts in the field and all agreed that there was need for a coordinated
program for experiments in order to determine whether or not weather
systems can be modified with useful results.40
The Advisory Group recommended establishment of six projects to
answer these questions and was requested to remain and furnish advice
to the projects and their sponsoring agencies, provide for information
exchange, and review results. One of these projects was sponsored by
the Weather Bureau, and of the five sponsored by the Defense Depart-
ment, four were conducted by contractors and the fifth by the Army
Signal Corps in house. In July 195± the Advisory Group met with
representatives of all the projects and sponsoring agencies, reviewed
the results in detail, and recommended that full reports on each proj-
ect be published. Project results were subsequently reported in a 1957
monograph of the American Meteorological Society.41
Advisory Committee on Weather Control
The first major comprehensive study of weather modification and
its ramifications was undertaken by the Advisory Committee on
Weather Control, following the congressional mandate under Public
Law 83-256, of August 13, 1953, which established the Committee and
directed that the study and evaluation of weather modification be per-
formed. The Committee was comprised of the Secretaries of five de-
partments and the Director of the National Science Foundation, or
their designees, and five private members, including the Chairman,
who were appointed by the President.42 Chaired by Dr. Howard T.
Orville, the Committee forwarded its two-volume report 43 to Presi-
dent Eisenhower on December 31, 1 0r>7, after the June 30, 1956, termi-
nation date for the act had been extended by Public Law 84—664 of
July 9. 1950. In its final report the committee recommended : 44
(1) That encouragement be given for the widest possible competent
research in meteorology and related fields. Such research should be
4 Petterssen. Sverre. "Reports on Experiments with Artificial Cloud Nucleation : Intro-
ductory Note." In Sverre Petterssen. Jerome Spar. Ferguson Hall, Roscoe R. Braham, Jr.,
! lis J. Rattan. Horace R. Byers. H. J. aufm Kampe, J. J. Kelly, and H. K. Weickmann.
Cloud and Weather Modification: a Group of Field Experiments. Meteorologieil mono-
hs, vol. 2. No. 11. American Meteorological Society, Boston, July 1957. pp. 2-3.
Ibid,, 115 pp.
43 Public Law 83-256, sections 4 and 5.
Arlvisorv Committee on Weather Control, final report of thp Advisory Committee on
Wp.itbf>r Control, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1958, in two volumes,
22-422 pp.
« Ibid., vol. I. pp. vll-viii.
237
undertaken by Government agencies, universities, industries, and other
organizations.
(2) That the Government sponsor meteorological research more
vigorously than at present. Adequate support is particularly needed to
maintain continuity and reasonable stability for long-term projects.
(3) That the administration of Government-sponsored research pro-
vide freedom and latitude for choosing methods and goals. Emphasis
should be put on sponsoring talented men as well as their specihc
projects.
(4) That an agency be designated to promote and support research
in the needed fields, and to coordinate research projects, it should also
constitute a central point for the assembly, evaluation, and dissemina-
tion of information. This agency should be the National Science
Foundation.
(5) That whenever a research project has the endorsement of the
National Science Foundation and requires facilities to achieve its pur-
pose, the agency having jurisdiction over such facilities should pro-
vide them.
National Academy of Sciences studies
The Committee on Atmospheric Sciences of the National Academy
of Sciences (NAS/CAS) produced its report on the first of two major
studies on weather modification in 1966. The report, entitled "Weather
and Climate Modification : Problems and Prospects,'' 45 was prepared
by the Committee's Panel on Weather and Climate Modification, with
joint support from the National Science Foundation and the Com-
merce Department's Environmental Science Services Administration.
Volume 1 of the report contains a summary of the study and recom-
mendations, while the second volume presents a general assessment of
the subject, on which the panel based its conclusions and recommenda-
tions. The report expressed cautious optimism regarding the future of
weather modification. Among its recommendations were an increase
in Federal support from the 1965 level of $5 million to at least $30
million by 1970 and the early establishment of several carefully de-
signed, randomized seeding experiments, planned in such a way as to
permit assessment of the seedability of various storm types. The re-
port addressed mostly technical and administrative problems; it did
not consider social, legal, and economic aspects of the subject, since
these topics were taken up in a concurrent study by the NSF's Special
Commission on Weather Modification, which worked closely with the
NAS panel.46
The second major study was completed by the Panel on Weather
and Climate Modification of the NAS Committee on Atmospheric
Sciences in 1973. 47 Sponsored jointly by the National Science Founda-
tion and the Department of Commerce, the panel was given respon-
sibility in the study "(1) to determine the scientific and national prog-
ress in weather modification since the earlier study of the field was
reported upon in 1966, (2) to consider future activities that would
45 National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council, Committee on Atmospheric
Sciences. Wenther and Climate Modification : Problems and Prospects. Publication No. 1350,
Washington. D.C., 1966. in 2 volumes. 40+212 pp.
46 See discussion be^w on reports bv the National Science Foundation, p. 239.
47 National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council, Committee on Atmospheric
Sciences, "Weather Modification : Problems and Progress," ISBN 0-309-02121-9, Washing-
ton, D.C., 1973. 280 pp.
238
guide and strengthen work toward further progress, (3) to examine
and clarify the statistical design and evaluation of modification ac-
tivities, and (4) to determine the current circumstances bearing on the
increase, decrease, and redistribution of precipitation." 48 In its report,
the panel attempted to fufill these objectives and further proposed
the following three goals for improving the science and technology of
weather modification : 49
1. Completion of research to put precipitation modification on a
sound basis by 1980.
2. Development during the next decade of the technology required
to move toward mitigation of severe storms.
3. Establishment of a program that will permit determination by
1980 of the extent of inadvertent modification of local weather and
global climate as a result of human activities.
Research programs required to achieve these goals were outlined
along with basic functions to be performed by the several Federal agen-
cies. These organizational recommendations for the Federal program
were : " (1) the identification of a lead agency, (2) the establishment of
a laboratory dedicated to the achievement of the proposed national
goals, and (3) assignment to the recently established National Advisory
Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere of the responsibility for examin-
ing the public policy issues of weather modification, as well as the
development of organization and legislative proposals."' 50
Studies by the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences
(WAS)
Another report to appear in 1966 was the first of two by the ICAS
on weather modification, which prescribed a recommended national
program in the field.51 Compiled by the chairman of the ICAS Select
Panel on Weather Modification, Dr. Homer E. Newell of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, the report laid out details for
such a national program and contained, as appendices, the earlier
recommended program of the ICAS Select Panel itself, as well as
recommendations from the concurrent studies by the NAS and the
NSF Special Commission.
The ICAS completed another interagency study in 1971, when it
produced a report which outlines a program for accelerating national
progress in weather modification.52 The report attempted to identify
national weather modification needs and designated research projects
for meeting these needs as national projects, each with a responsible
lead agency and support from other Federal agencies.53 Some of these
projects were already underway or in planning stages by various
agencies. Few were ever consummated as truly interagency national
projects as envisioned, though there was some degree of cooperation
in some, such as the National Hail Research Experiment (NHRE),
*8 Ibid., p. ill.
*» Ibid., p. xv.
« Newell, Homer E., "A Recommended National Program in Weather Modification," Fed-
eral Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric
Sciences, ICAS Kept. No. 10a, November 1966, 93 pp.
52 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interagency Committee for Atmospheric
Sciences, "A National Program for Accelerating Progress in Weather Modification, ICAS
Kept. No. 15a. June 1971, 50 pp. „ . 21..Aa 00. .
M For a list of the seven national projects identified by the ICAS, see p. 224. under the
discussion of the activities of the ICAS.
239
and others, such as Interior's Colorado River Basin pilot project
(CKBPP), continued essentially as large single-agency projects.
Domestic Council study
A weather modification study was undertaken in 1974, following
establishment of a Subcommittee on Climate Change by the Environ-
mental Eesources Committee of the Domestic Council. Comprised of
representatives from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
and most Federal agencies with atmospheric sciences programs, except-
ing the Defense Department, the subcommittee attempted to assess the
Federal role in weather modification. Drawing upon recent documenta-
tion on the progress, status, and problems in the field, and through a 2-
day hearing of representatives from various parts of the weather modi-
fication community and other interested groups, the subcommittee
prepared its report in 1975.54 In its executive summary, the Domestic
Council report found that :
Weather modification represents a potential tool for exerting a favorable influ-
ence over destructive weather events and for augmenting water supplies in some
areas where additional water is needed for energy, food, and fiber production ; 55
and the following general recommendation was formulated :
A policy should be adopted to develop, encourage, and maintain a comprehen-
sive and coordinated national program in weather modification research and in
the beneficial application of the technology along the lines of the recommenda-
tions embodied in this report.56
Specific findings and recommendations were also given for each of
the three areas of research, operations, and regulation, which the sub-
committee examined.57
Policy and planning reports produced by Federal agencies
Since the very early studies of the 1950-51 era, instigated primarily
by the Department of Defense, other Federal agencies have undertaken
major policy and planning studies, either as "in-house" efforts or
through contractors or committees established by the agency.
The National Science Foundation has produced the greatest num-
ber of agency policy reports, based on studies conducted by its Special
Commission on Weather Modification and by contractors. Two reports
appearing in 1966 were prepared by or under auspices of the Special
Commission, culminating a study authorized in October 1963 by the
National Science Board.58, 59 The Special Commission, established in
June 1964 and chaired by Dr. A. R. Chamberlain of Colorado State
University, had been "* * * requested to examine the physical,
bilogical, legal, social, and political aspects of the field and make rec-
ommendations concerning future policies and programs." 60 Phvsical
aspects were studied in cooperative liaison with the NAS panel in its
concurrent study ; 61 however, the membership of the Special Commis-
sion reflected expertise in the other aspects of weather modification not
64 Domestic Council. Environmental Resources Committee. Subcommittee on Climate
Change, "The Federal Role in Weather Modification," Washington, D.C., December 1975,
39 pp.
55 Ibid., p. i.
» Ibid.
wIbid.. pp. i-iii.
68 Special Commission on Weather Modification. NSF 66-3. 1966. 155 pp.
59 Taubenfeld. Howard J. "Weather Modification: Law. Controls. Operations." report to
the Special Commission on Weather Modification. National Science Foundation, NSF 66-7,
Washington. D.C.. 1966. 79 pp.
*> Special Commission on Weather Modification. NSF 66-3, 1966, p. iii.
61 See p. 237 above.
240
previously addressed by the other studies. Much of the background
work for the treatment of these other aspects of the problem was sup-
ported by NSF grants and subsequently published as separate reports.
These included the biological aspects, human dimensions, international
relations, and legal aspects. Of these separate studies all were published
in various nongovernmental media, except the last one, which appeared
in the format of the XSF Special Commission report.62 All of these
aspects were reviewed and summarized, and recommendations were
presented, in the principal Commission report, which sought to answer
the following question : "With the physical possibility of modifying
the weather and climate already partly demonstrated, how by artifi-
cially inducing deliberate changes in the environment may man act to
control or develop changes in the atmosphere considered to be desirable
by society ?" 63
A contracted study was undertaken for the NSF by the Rand Corp.
in 1962 to establish the framework of a cohesive approach to research
on weather modification. Part of the program was to conduct a com-
prehensive state-of-the-art review of the field: however, the appear-
ance of the 1966 National Academy study 64 negated the immediate ne-
cessity for such a reexamination. Nearly 3 years later Rand did publish
such a review, recognizing that there had been "sufficient progre-s in
the overall field of weather modification research to now warrant a new
overview." 65
The authors of the report stressed the following points: "(1) the
possibility of inadvertent weather or climate modification is rapidly
becoming a probability, as human effects on the atmosphere and the
surface of the planet grow at an increasing rate: (2) progress in
weather modification research continues to be hampered by the preva-
lent lack of cohesive effort by both theoreticians and experimenters;
(3) computers of advanced design and increased capacity will handle
atmospheric models of considerably greater sophistication than in the
past; and (-1) this is a not-to-be-neglected opportunity for interactive
research — constant two-way feedback from theory to experiment to
theory, with dynamic atmospheric models facilitating each advance." 66
General and specific recommendations concerning what they consid-
ered to be the most urgently needed research areas and required instru-
mentation developments were included in the report.
In 1965, following a request from the Chief of the U.S. Weather
Bureau, Dr. Robert M. White, the Bureau published an "in-house"
report on its role in weather modification research.07 In the report it
was recognized thai research responsibilities extend beyond considera-
tion of scientific and technical problems; however, it dealt primarily
with meteorology, leaving to other ongoing studies the treatment of
administrative, 'military, international, and ecological aspects, al-
though some legal and legislative questions were discussed.r,s It was
02 Taubenfeld, NSF 66-7. „ -m _ _
°3 Special Commission on Weather Modification. XSF 66-3. 1966, pp. 7-8.
•* National Academy of Sciences, publication Xo. 1350, 1966.
« Staff of the Weather Modification Research Project of the Rand Corn . Weather Modi-
fication Progress and the Need for Interactive Research." The Rand Corp., memorandum
RM-5835-NSF. Santa Monica. Calif., October 1968, 88 pp.
^GdVman Y)onald L., .Tames R. Hibbs. and Paul I,. Lnskin. "Weather and Climate Morti-
fication," a" report to the Chief. U.S. Weather Bureau. U.S. Department of Commerce,
Weather Bureau, Washington, D.C, July 10, 1965, 46 pp.
« Ibid., p. 1.
241
made clear that the report was not intended to be statement of policy
of the Bureau, the Commerce Department, or the Federal Govern-
ment, but was rather to be considered as a contribution to the national
discussion of the future direction of weather modification in the United
States.69
Another one of the many studies appearing in 1966 was a report by
the Commerce Department's Environmental Science Services Admin-
istration (ESSA), the organization which preceded the present Na-
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (XOAA).70 Prepared
in response to a request by the ICAS, the report was prepared by an
"in-house" task group to define an expanded ESSA program in light
of the recommendations of the XAS Committee on Atmospheric Sci-
ences Panel on Weather and Climate Modification and those of the
XSF Special Commission on Weather Modification, which appeared
in reports that year.71' 72 It outlined a 5-year program of research for
the fiscal years 1968 through 197:2, with projects ranging from large-
scale field experiments to those in more basic aspects of atmospheric
science pertinent to weather modification.
A report was published in 1968 by the U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, as part of the continuing joint research planning by the Depart-
ment and State agricultural experiment stations.73 The recommended
program of research and development in weather modification for
agriculture and forestry supplemented the national program of re-
search for agriculture. The proposed program addressed direct modifi-
cation of the weather and the resulting biological, economic, and so-
cial consequences of such activity. It was intended to contribute to
knowledge and technology needed "in the total enterprise of agricul-
ture and forestry" and to "provide the basis for essential decisionmak-
ing on weather modification programs affecting nearly every aspect of
agriculture and forestry.74 The report discussed national goals, defined
a national research and development program for agencies of the
Department of Agriculture and the State agricultural experiment
stations, and reviewed the necessary research resources, including man-
power, facilities, and organization. For each major phase of the pro-
posed research activity, the report recommended levels of Federal in-
volvement and financial investment for fiscal years 1972 and 1977.75
Federal Programs ix Weather Modification
introduction and fuxdixcr summaries
e The Federal Government has been involved in weather modifica-
tion research and development for more than 30 years. As noted ear-
lier, these research programs are scattered throughout a number of
Federal departments and agencies. They are not carried out fully in-
dependent of one another, however, since they are coordinated by man-
69 Ibid., p. iv.
70 U.S. Department of Commerce, Environmental Science Services Administration. "An
Outline of a Proposed 5-Year Plan in Weather Modification," Rockville, Md., April 1966.
66 pp.
71 National Academy of Sciences, publication Xo. 1350.
72 Special Commission on Weather Modification. XSF 66-3.
73 Joint Task Force of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the State universities and
land grant colleges. "A National Program of Research for Weather Modification." U.S. De-
partment of Agriculture. Research Program Development and Evaluation Staff. Washing-
ton, D.C., January 196S, 3S pp.
7* Ibid , p. 1.
73 Ibid., pp. 6-8.
242
agers at the program level, especially through the Interdepartmental
Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (IOAS). and by scientists and
engineers at the working level through a number of mechanisms in-
cluding interagency joint projects and the activities of professional
organizations.
The Federal weather modification program has been considered to
be composed of the several agency programs identified as weather
modification by the member agencies of the IOAS and reported as
such to the ICAS. According to the latest IOAS annual report.7'3
weather modification programs will be sponsored during fiscal year
1978 by six departments and agencies: these are the Departments of
Agriculture. Commerce, Defense, and Interior; the National Science
Foundation; and the Energy Eesearch and Development Administra-
tion (part of the Department of Energy as of October 1. 1977) . As late
as fiscal year 1976 the Department of Transportation also reported a
program in weather modification, and the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (XASA) identified a research program in warm
fog dispersal through fiscal year 1973. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) supports research on inadvertent weather change as
a joint sponsor of the METROMEX project in St. Louis and vicinity.77
but does not choose to report this research as weather modification.
In the early years of the ICAS member agencies reported their fund-
ing for support of atmospheric science only in the two broad cate-
gories— meteorology and aeronomy. Beginning with fiscal year 1963,
however, there has been a discreet identification of funds for weather
modification; the total Federal effort amounted to $2.7 million that-
fiscal year. Though there have been occasional dips since then, funding
for Federal programs has increased steadily to $20.3 million for fiscal
year 1976; however, planned fiscal year 1978 funds have dropped to
$17.1 million.78
Table 2 summarizes funding for the Federal weather modification
research program by agency and by research category, as reported to
the ICAS, for fiscal years 1976 through 1978, data for the latest year
being estimated. Figure 2 shows the course of funding from fiscal years
1966 through 1978, from ICAS data assembled by Fleagle, who has
recently reviewed the history of Federal weather modification funding
since 1946.79 From 1946 to 1958 the Federal Government funded several
extensive field research programs, the Department of Defense provid-
ing the major support through university and industrial contracts.
Since expenditures for these programs were not reported under
weather modification, Federal funding for this period cannot be
determined.80
78 Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences, "National Atmospheric Sci-
ences Program : Fiscal Year 197S." ICAS 21-FY78, 1977, p. 87.
77 See discussion of METROMEX under the program of the National Science Foundation,
p. 38 3 ff.
78 Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology : Committee on
Atmosnhere and Oceans ; Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences ; "Na-
tional Atmospheric Sciences Program : Fiscal Year 1978," ICAS 21-FY78, August 1977,
p. 87.
70 Fleagle, Robert G.. "An Analysis of Federal Policies in Weather Modification." Back-
ground paper prepared for the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advi-
sory Hoard, Seattle, March 1977, pp. 6-14.
80 Ibid., p. 6.
243
TABLE 2.— SUMMARY OF FEDERAL WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 1976
THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 1978 (ESTIMATED), BY AGENCY AND BY RESEARCH CATEGORY, AS REPORTED TO THE
INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE FOR ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES. (FROM ICAS 21— FISCAL YEAR 1978).
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year—
1976 197T 1977 1978
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce.
Department of Defense:
Army... .
Navy..
Air Force
Department of Interior
Depa rtment of Transportation
Energy Research and Development Administration
National Science Foundation
Total....
Precipitation modification.
Fop and cloud modification
Hail suppression
Lightning modification.
Hurricane and severe storm modification
Social, economic, legal and ecological studies
Inadvertent modification of weather and climate. .
Support and services.
70 21 55 20
6,334 1,146 4,577 5,001
100 119 268 190
900 175 221 210
409 112 550 575
4,649 1,632 6,446 7,613
555
1,086 10 1,155 1,260
6,216 1,110 5,702 2,250
20,329 4,589 18,974 17,119
3,382 1,057 4,881 5,900
2,164 665 1,906 1,868
3,080 488 2,950 1,180
70 21 55 20
1,961 461 1,911 1,810
718 135 687 450
4,834 889 3,693 4,158
4,120 873 2,891 1,733
g * . \ I I I I I I | I I I | |
66 68 70 72 74 76 78
FISCAL YEAR
Figure 2. — The course of Federal weather modification funding (planning budg-
ets and actual expenditures) from fiscal years 1966 to 1978, as reported by
the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences. (Adapted from
Fleagle, 1977, with latest data from ICAS 21-FY78.)
244
In the period 1958 to 1965 the XSF, as part of its lead agency
responsibilities, reported Federal expenditures in weather modifica-
tion. Reported expenditures reached about $3 million in fiscal year
1965, although costs of aircraft, radar, and manpower provided by the
Defense Department were not identified. Beginning with fiscal year
1966, expenditures have been reported annually by the ICAS under
reasonably constant definitions and guidelines.81
The general growth in Federal funding between fiscal years 1966
and 1972 can be seen in figure 2. Fleagle speculates that the funding-
drop following 1968 could have been a result of research curtailments
brought on by the Vietnam war or of the failure by the Congress to
designate a lead agency after that role was taken from the XSF by
Public Law 90-407. He feels that the resurgence in 1971 and 1972 could
have resulted from a new emphasis on weather modification, evidenced
by the endorsement by the Federal Council for Science and Technology
of seven national projects identified by the ICAS 82 and the appearance
of a National Academy of Sciences study which emphasized improved
management and organization.83 In January 1973 five of the seven
national projects were suspended or terminated, owing to the exten-
sive impoundments of appropriated funds by the President. The na-
tional projects represented about one-half of the total weather modifi-
cation budget, exclusive of classified Department of Defense expendi-
tures. The partial recovery through fiscal year 1976 was based on
increases in the Department of the Interior's Project Sky water,
XOAA's preparation for resumed hurricane modification research,
and ERDA's growing research program on the inadvertent effects
of increased energy generation.84
Fleagle notes that "* * * total funding for weather modification has
improved over the period from 1966 to 1977 largely in response to
what are perceived as the needs for prompt application of the tech-
nology," while "reductions have occurred as results of factors external
to weather modification and external to the agencies." 85
Table 3 is a summary by agency of Federal weather modification
research support since fiscal year 1963, excluding inadvertent weather
modification research. The data were compiled by Corzine of XOAA
from a variety of sources, which are identified in the table, and were
accurate as of March 1977.86
Changnon compared the Federal weather modification funding data
with those of the entire Federal research budget.87 From fiscal year
1973 to fiscal year 1974, for example, the total Federal research budget
increased 6.5 percent, and federally sponsored civilian research (non-
space and nonmilitary) increased 11.8 percent, while weather modifi-
cation funding dropped 21 percent. Between fiscal years 1969 and
1973. a period of rapid growth for weather modification support, civil-
ian research and development increased 120 percent while weather
modification research increased 87 percent.
61 Ibid., pp. 6-7.
S2 See n. 225 for a listing of those national projects.
83 National Academy of Sciences, National Resenrch Council. Committee on Atmospheric
Sciences. "The Atmospheric Sciences and Man's Needs ; Priorities for the Future." Wash-
ington. D.C., May 1971. 88 pp.
*l Fleagle, "An Analysis of Federal Policies in Weather Modification." 1977. pp. 7-9.
65 Ibid., p. 9.
86 Corzine. Harold; in Fred D. White (compiler). "Highlights of Solicited Opinions on
Weather Modification" (a summary) ; prepared for use by t' e Department of Commerce
Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration. Rockville. Md.. March 1977. p. 30.
87 Changnon, "The Federal Role in Weather Modification," 1977, pp. 17-18.
245
TABLE 3.-FEDERAL SUPPORT OF WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH, FISCAL YEARS 1963-78. (FROM CORZINE,
1977.) 1 2
[In millions of dollars]
Fiscal year3
Commerce
Interior
NSF
DOD
Agriculture
Others <
Total
1963
0.19
0.10
1.32
0. 96
0.13
0.05
2.75
1964
.18
.18
1.57
1.41
.12
.07
3.53
1965
.11
1.26
2.01
1.45
.14
0
4.97
1966..
.65
2.91
2.00
1.27
.14
.07
7.04
1967
1.23
3.73
3.30
1.33
.25
.08
9.92
1968
1.53
4.63
3.39
1.41
.18
.16
11.30
1969
1.14
4.27
2.73
1.63
.29
.18
10.24
1970....
1.33
4. 77
3.15
1.85
.29
.20
11.59
1971
3.01
6.52
3.79
1.44
.36
.72
15.84
1972
3.94
6. 66
5. 50
1.82
.36
.40
18.68
1973
3. 77
6.37
6.20
1.21
.37
.39
18.31
1974
3.30
3.90
4. 70
1.20
.27
.10
13.47
1975
2.49
4.00
4.70
1.14
.09
0
12.42
1976 (estimate)
1977
4.64
4. 94
5.60
5 1. 12
.07
0
16. 37
4.58
6.76
4.40
5 2.78
.06
0
18.58
1978
3.84
5.70
2.00
5 2.16
.02
13.72
1 Excludes inadvertent weather and climate modification research funds.
2 Excludes DOD spending for weather modification operations in Southeast Asia and ?t military airports.
3 Data based on: 1963-68, NSF Annual Reports on Weather Modification. 1969-71, ICAS Annual Reports 14, 15, and 16.
1972-76 material collected for Domestic Council Report (figures fcr 1975 and 1976 brought up to date). 1977-78, figures
submitted to NOAA.
4 Includes Transportation, EPA, and NASA.
5 Includes approximately 0.92, 2.18, and 1.56 for thermal modification of warm fog.
Federal research and development funding for fiscal years 1971
through 1976, according' to major weather modification research cate-
gory, is summarized in table 1. which also indicates the agencies under
whose programs the funds were expended. Changnon notes that these
data show that: 88
1. The greatest effort has been in precipitation modification, but with
a. general decrease in this effort with time;
•2. There has been a rapid growth of spending on inadvertent modi-
fication research;
3. Funding for fog suppression has been decreasing; and
4. In recent years the research categories receiving the major support
are precipitation (snow and rain) modification, hail suppression, and
inadvertent modification.
TABLE 4— FEDERAL WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH SUPPORT BY RESEARCH CATEGORY, FOR FISCAL YEARS
1971 THROUGH 1976. (FROM CHANGNON, 1977.)
[In millions of dollars)
Fiscal year-
Supporting
Type 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 agencies i
Precipitation modification 8.0 6.2 6.0 3.7 4.4 5.0 DOC, DOI, NSF.
Fog and cloud mcdif.cation 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.4 1.1 1 3 DOD, DOT, NSF.
Hail suppression 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.8 NSF
Lightning modification .9 .7 .7 .7 .2 .1 DOA, DOD, NSF.
Severe storm modif.cation .8 1.9 1.7 1.5 1 8 2 0 DOC
Societal-economic issues .8 .9 1.1 8 6 11 NSF DOI
Inadvertent. .6 1.7 1.7 2.9 5.2 4.9 NSF', DOT, DOC.
i DOC = Commerce; DOD = Defense; NSF=National Science Foundation; DOI = Interior ; DOT=Transportation; DOA =
Agriculture.
58 Ibid., p. 18.
246
There have been minimal Federal efforts in operational weather
modification; however, since these activities are usually conducted as
parts of other operations not considered weather modification, the
expenditures are difficult to identify. These activities have included
fog dispersal at airports by the Navy and the Air Force; precipita-
tion augmentation operations by the Defense Department overseas at
the request of the Governments of Panama, Portugal, Okinawa, and
the Philippines; and 1971 efforts to reduce drought in Texas, Okla-
homa, Arizona, and Florida by the Department of the Interior, the
Air Force, and NO A A.89 Shapley reported in 1974 that estimated
expenditures by the Defense Department between 1966 and 1972 in
attempts to increase rain during the Southeast Asia war were $21.6
million.90
Federal weather modification programs are summarized, by agency,
in the following subsections. Included are discussions of the pro-
grams of the departments and agencies listed in table 2; the Depart-
ment of Transportation has been included since its program was ter-
minated so recently. Discussions contain not only those projects which
are underway or planned for fiscal year 1978, but also activities of
the recent past, in order to show the continuity and the development or
phasing out processes for each of the several programs.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Introduction
A major weather modification research program has been conducted
by the Bureau of Reclamation in the Department of the Interior since
1961. The purpose of this Atmospheric Water Resources Management
Program, also called "Project Sky water," lias been to develop and ver-
ify a practical cloud-seeding technology for increasing water supplies
in the Western States. Initiated through a congressional write-in of
$100,000 in the fiscal year 1962 Public Works appropriation, the mis-
sion of the project was simply stated as "research on increasing rain-
fall by cloud seeding." 91 Congressional direction has been almost en-
tirely through provisions in Public Works appropriation documents.
A summary of the appropriation language contained in these docu-
ments between 1961 and 1977 is found in appendix J.
Since its inception, the program has been characterized by the fol-
lowing three guidelines that were established.92
1. It was to be an applied research program, using "engineering
approaches" rather than a basic or pure research program.
2. Scient ific expertise was to be used where it existed rather than
from an "in-house" effort.
3. Additional water and benefits accruing to local groups from re-
search seeding would not be reimbursed.
f0 Ibid.
00 Shaplev. Deborah. "Weather Warfare: Pentagon Concedes 7-year Vietnam Effort," Sci-
ence, vol. 184. No. 4141. June 7. 1974, p. 1059.
01 Bureau of Reclamation. U.S. Department of the Interior, "Atmospheric Water Resources
Management Program ; Project Skywater. Information Summary," presented before the U.S.
Department of Commerce National Weather Modification Advisory Board, May 31, 1977,
Washington, D.C., p. 1.
92 Ibid.
247
The Bureau of Reclamation, through Project Skywater, has been
the principal Federal agency concerned with the operational adapta-
tion of precipitation enhancement research.
Recent legislation in the 95th Congress has also enabled the Bureau
to provide grants to States in order to facilitate emergency weather
modification activities in hope of mitigating effects of the 1976-77
drought. This program, not part of the Atmospheric Water Resources
Management Program, is discussed in a subsequent section.93
Table 5 is a summary of weather modification research funding and
projected funding from fiscal year 1976 through fiscal year 1978 for
the Bureau of Reclamation. All of the funds shown are associated
with Project Skywater and do not include those previously mentioned
in connection with emergency grants for drought alleviation.
TABLE 5. — WEATHER MODIFICATION FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 1976 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 1978 FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, UNDER THE ATMOSPHERIC WATER RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (PROJECT SKYWATER)1
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year
Transition
Fiscal year
Fiscal year
1976
quarter
1977
1978
Precipitation management:
Snow augmentation (including SCPP)
375
50
400
1,750
Rain enhancement (HIPLEX)
2, 475
1, 007
3, 800
4, 000
Modeling and comprehensive analysis studies
500
100
470
300
Social, economic, legal and environmental
300
75
400
300
Support and services
2 999
MOO
2 1, 376
2 1, 263
Total
4, 649
1,632
6, 446
7,613
1 From Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for
Atmospheric Sciences. National Atmospheric Sciences program: Fiscal Year 1978. ICAS 21— Fiscal year 1978. August
1977, p. 91.
2 Includes computer and planning costs.
Project Skywater general discussion
Over the past decade, the Bureau of Reclamation's Atmospheric
Water Resources Management Program (Project Skywater) has ac-
counted for about one-third of the total Federal program in all forms
of weather modification. All of the Bureau's funding has been directed,
however, toward research in precipitation enhancement. Of the funds
appropriated, about 83 percent are used for contracted research. Table
6 shows the breakdown of funding for the fiscal years 1962 through
1977 by kinds of contractor and according to in-house or other Fed-
eral expenditure. From the table it can be seen that 41 percent has
been allocated to universities, 23 percent to private firms, 10 percent
to State governments, and 6 percent to other Federal agencies, while
17 percent has been spent by the Bureau for planning, management,
and in-house research. Table 7 shows the breakdown of these funds
in accordance with functions or major projects. The three major
projects in the table will be discussed briefly below.
93 See p. 266 of this section, and also see p. 202 under discussion of congressional
activities.
248
TABLE 6 -ATMOSPHERIC WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM; OBLIGATION SUMMARY FISCAL
YEAR 1962 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 1977 1
Total incurred
Fiscal year
Universities
Private
State
USBR2
Other Federal
obligations
1962
$70, 000
0
0
$30,000
0
$100,000
1963
83, 747
0
0
16,253
0
100, 000
1964
133, 000
0
0
42, 000
0
175,000
1965
459, 630
$283, 978
$3, 500
151,892
$201,000
1,100, 000
1966
1,531,400
637, 250
168, 700
303, 150
? qpd nnn
£, JCU, UUU
1967
1 989 321
779 125
361,300
368 396
251,858
3,750, 000
1968
2,717, 689
859' 000
345, 000
423', 311
286, 200
4, 631, 200
1 QfiQ
o 77R ok
obit, Idb
31 0 MO
oio, Dty
4bU, bob
273, 500
4, 689, 656
1970
2, 966, 200
873, 866
254,885
446,232
268, 325
4, 809, 508
1971
3,519,083
1,415,187
570,600
753, 436
335, 344
6, 593, 650
1972
3, 539, 323
1,348,203
664, 926
784, 857
321,597
6,658,906
1973
3,312,939
1, 105, 029
905, 200
889, 387
173, 021
6, 385, 576
1974..
899, 110
1,498, 982
336, 104
976, 747
189, 282
3,900, 225
1975
768, 911
1,318,961
2S6.227
1,270,634
342,491
3, 997, 224
1976
497, 572
1,480,462
617, 133
1,677, 593
391,196
4,663,956
Transition quarter
214, 245
609, 229
234, 528
469,914
96, 175
1, 624, 091
1977 (estimate)
1,800,000
1,600,000
1,200, 000
1,454,481
400, 000
6, 454, 481
Total
27, 278, 985
14, 669, 398
6, 276, 652
10, 518, 949
3, 869, 489
3 62,348, 381
Percent 44 23 10 17 6 100
1 Bureau of Reclamation. Atmospheric Water Resources Management Program: Project Skywater. Infcrmaticn summary.
May 31, 1977, p. 24.
2 Includes salaries, equipment, supplies, and computer costs.
3 Official total as corrected for recoveries, underf.nancing, and other adjustments.
Table 7. — Bureau of Reclamation Atmospheric Water Resources Management
Program. Allocation of Funding by Function and by Major Projects for Fiscal
Years 1962 Through 1977 1
Research and development $31, 749, 665
Environmental 2, 173, 676
Associated comprehensive studies 3, 296, 202
Colorado River Basin Pilot Project 5, 100, 792
Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project 866, 805
HIPLEX 10, 557, 767
Other pilot projects 1, 980, 000
Planning, management, and program support 6, 623, 471
62, 348, 381
1 Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior. Atmospheric water resources
management program : Project Skywater. Information summary, May 31, 1977, p. 23.
249
Artist's rendering of portable radar used in Project Sky water. (Courtesy of the
Bureau of Reclamation.)
250
Sky water has emphasized cooperation, joint participation, and cost
sharing with State resource and environmental agencies; and field
experiments have included research contracted with universities, State
agencies, and private firms. Funds have also been transferred to other
Federal agencies, who have cooperated in the various aspects of the
program. Table 8 is a listing of the principal contractors and Govern-
ment activities who have participated. Research contracts have been
concerned with winter orographic snowfall augmentation and in-
creases in summer convective cloud rainfall — both of which are prin-
cipal precipitation mechanisms in the Western United States. The
distribution of major field projects underway or planned during fiscal
year 1977 as part of Skywater and the locations of contractor institu-
tions and Federal activities involved in various aspects of the program
are shown in figure 3.
TABLE 8. — PRINCIPAL CONTRACTORS AND RESEARCH C00PERAT0RS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECT SKYWATER i
University Private Government
University of Arizona.
Brigham Young University.
University of California.
University of California at Los Angeles.
University of Colorado.
Colorado State University.
University of Denver.
Fresno State College.
Harvard University.
University of Michigan.
Montana State University.
University of Nevada.
New Mexico State University.
New York University.
University of North Dakota.
North Dakota State University.
University of Oklahoma.
Pennsylvania State University.
San Diego State University.
South Dakota School of Mines and
Technology.
South Dakota State University.
Taft College.
Texas A. & M. Research Foundation.
Utah State University.
University of Washington.
University of Wisconsin.
University of Wyoming.
Amos Eddy, Inc.
Aeromet, Inc.
Aerometric Research, Inc.
Convergence Systems, Inc.
Colorado International Corp.
E. Bollay Associates.
E.G. & G., Inc.
Electronic Techniques, Inc.
Enterprise Electronics, Inc.
Environmental Research and Tech-
nology, Inc.
Geophysical Research and Develop-
ment Corp.
Human Ecology Research Services.
M. B. Associates, Inc.
Meteorology Research, Inc.
North American Weather Con-
sultants.
Stanford Research, Inc.
T. G. Owe Berg, Inc.
Travelers Research Inc.
Weather Science, Inc.
Western Scientific Services, Inc.
U.S. Air Force.
U.S. Army (Pueblo Depot).
California Department of Transportation.
California Highway Partol.
Colorado Department of Natural Resources.
Colorado River Municipal Water District.
Forest Service.
General Services Administration.
Geological Survey.
Illinois State Water Survey.
Kansas Water Resources Board.
Montana Department of Natural Resources
and Conservation.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.
National Science Foundation.
Navy Weapons Center.
Navy Weather Research Facility.
Nebraska Department of Agriculture.
North Dakota Weather Modification Board.
Sacramento River Forecast Center.
Soil Conservation Service.
South Dakota Weather Control Com-
mission.
Southwestern Water Conservation District.
Washington Department of Ecology.
Texas Water Development Board.
Utah Department of Water Resources.
i Bureau of Reclamation. Atmospheric Water Resources Management Program: Project Skywater. Information summary,
May 31. 1977. p. 26.
The widespread field projects of Skywater from 1962 through 1977
are shown in figure 4. In recent years, research experiments and studies
have been concentrated on three major projects, one of which has
just been completed, while the other two are in realtively early stages.
These projects, each of which is discussed below in some detail, are the
Colorado River Basin Pilot Project, the High Plains Cooperative Pro-
gram (HIPLEX), and the Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project. In addi-
I ion lo t he concentrated research effort in these three regional projects,
the Bureau continues to provide technical planning and equipment
assistance to local projects in States such as North Dakota, Kansas,
Texas, and Pi ah. Support is also being given to the development of
the application of satellite imagery for cloud seeding decisions and
evaluations and to the adaptation of research cloud models for use in
local operations. The Skywater Environmental Computer Network
251
provides real-time data support to both field research and commercial
weather modification projects on a cooperative basis. Figure 5 is a
schematic of the Data Network, with its central unit in Denver, which
also provides access to real time and archived data for a variety of
other research projects. Cloud models and other computerized aids are
made available for testing by winter and summer operators through
the Environmental Data Network in return for practical appraisals of
usefulness and recommendations for improvement.
Planning and other preliminary field studies for possible future
weather modification cooperative research in the Colorado River
Basin are continuing. Recently, the final programmatic environmental
impact statement for Project Skywater was completed.94 Several site
specific environmental impact statements, including one for the Colo-
rado River Basin Pilot Project, were completed earlier. A compre-
hensive assessment of the entire field of precipitation enhancement is
being performed, which includes reviews of both research and opera-
tional project results.
Project Skywater = FY 1977
Figure 3.— Major Skywater field projects and locations of contractors and Federal
institutions during fiscal year 1977. (From Project Skywater information
summary, May 31, 1977.)
e* U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, "Final Environmental State-
ment for Project Skywater ; a Program of Research in Precipitation Management, ' Division
of Atmospheric Water Resources Management, INT FES 77-39, Denver, Oct. 2o, 1977. In
three volumes. (376 and 316 and 266 pp.)
252
Skywater Field Projects 1962-1977
A COOPERATIVE PROGRAMS (9)
Figure 4. — Locations of Skywater field projects from 1962 through 1977. ( From
Project Skywater information summary, May 31, 1977.)
PROJECT SKYWATER ENVIRONMENTAL COMPUTER NETWORK
Operational
Research Seeding
Projects Projects
Model
Developers
Other
Users
Direct Dial Lines To Users
NWS Observations
\ / /
Denver
Bureou of Reclamation
-Data Bank
-Programs
-Models
-Analysis
-Plotting
2400 Baud High Sped
■Processed Data
-Grid Forecasts.
Suitland
NMC
Q ERTS
X
Goddard
NASA
Figure 5. — Schematic of the Project Skywater Environmental Computer Network.
(From Project Skywater information summary, May 31, 1977.)
253
34-857 O - 79 - 19
254
The Colorado River Basin Pilot Project {CRBPP)
This Avas a large weather modification research project conducted
by the Bureau of Reclamation under Project Sky water to determine
the feasibility of augmenting high mountain snowpacks in the San
Juan Mountains of southwestern Colorado. The seeding and data col-
lection phase of this large project was conducted between 1970 and
1975, although planning for the experiment began in 1967. Project
evaluations were prepared in 1976, and further analyses and environ-
mental studies are continuing in 1977. The target area selected for the
CRBPP (or the San Juan Project as it is sometimes called) covered
nearly 3,400 km2 (1,300 mi2) of sparsely populated mountainous ter-
rain east and northeast of Durango, Colo. Elevations extended from
above 2,750 meters to 4,200 meters.95 Figure 6 shows the locations of
target areas and instrumentation arrays in the CRBPP in southwest
Colorado.
The Colorado River Basin is one of the most water-short areas in
the Nation, and weather modification has been recommended as a
practical and immediately available water augmentation technology.96
Preliminary results show that a 19-percent augmentation in streamfiow
may be possible through seeding in this area of headwaters of the
Colorado River Basin.97
05 Aerometric Research, Inc., "Colorado River Basin IMlot Project; Executive Summary
of Comprehensive Evaluation," prepared for Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclama-
tion under contract No. 14-06-D-7332. Goleta, Calif., December 1976, p. 1.
08 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences, "National Atmospheric Sciences Program : Fiscal Year 1977." ICAS 20-
FY 77, May 1976, p. 92.
07 Bureau of Reclamation, "Atmospheric Water Resources Management Program ; Project
Skywater," May 31, 1977, p. 25.
Figure 6. — Map showing the locations of target areas and instrumentation
arrays in the Colorado River Basin Pilot Project in southwest Colorado. (From
Bureau of Reclamation.)
256
Kesults of analyses of the San Juan project indicate that winter oro-
graphic, storms are somewhat more complex than thought originally,
but that additional snowpack can be provided through seeding.
Characteristics of treatable storms have been identified more cleary.98
In a major analysis and evaluation of the project it was determined
that many of the clouds actually seeded in the experiment were not of
a suitable type, that on some experimental days the weather did not
develop as forecast, that in some cases seeding material remained in
the area beyond planned experimental seeding periods, and on some
days rapid weather changes produced conditions in which precipita-
tion was decreased by seeding." Consequently, "the total unstratified
statistical analysis found no difference between precipitation on seeded
experimental days and control days. However, when days of missed
forecasts were removed, and data from experimental days were reduced
to 6 -hour time blocks to improve the correlation between meteorological
covariates and precipitation, increases during certain classes of seeded
cases were statistically significant." 1 Nevertheless, the evaluation re-
port concludes that, "the overall potential for seeding-produced in-
creases in precipitation during a winter of average snowfall was de-
termined to be about 10 percent. The resulting potential increase in
streamflow of about 19 percent is 197 million m3 for the San Juan
Kiver." 2
98 U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, "Reclamation in the Seven-
ties," second progress report. A water resources technical publication, research rept. No.
28. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office. 1!*77. p. 2.
09 Atmospheric Research, Inc., "Colorado River Basin Pilot Project ; Executive Summary
of Comprehensive Evaluation," 1976, p. 3.
1 Ibid.
2 Ibid.
Remotely operated cloud seeding generator similar to those used in the Colorado
River Basin Pilot Project. (Courtesy of the Bureau of Reclamation.)
258
The High Plains Cooperative Program {HIPLEX)
HIPLEX is a comprehensive weather modification research pro-
gram designed "to develop a practical, scientifically sound, and social-
ly acceptable technology for precipitation management applicable to
summer connective cloud systems in the High Plains region of the
United States." 3 The overall goal of HIPLEX is "to establish a veri-
fied, effective cloud seeding technology and a policy and management
background for responsibly producing additional rain in the semiarid
Plain States. This goal includes improving the current operational
cloud seeding methods, transferring the techniques and results to con-
cerned groups ; and enhancing public confidence in their use." 4
Kesearch in HIPLEX is being conducted at three field sites : Miles
City, Mont. ; Goocllancl, Kans. ; and Big Spring, Tex. (see fig. 3) . These
cities represent, respectively, the northern, central, and sourthern
High Plains ; they were chosen in view of the known or suspected varia-
tion of climatic conditions and cloud characteristics over the north-
south extent of the High Plains and the obvious implications of such
variations on technology transferability.5 Examination and under-
standing of the social, political, and agronomic differences across the
High Plains and their implications for effective technology transfer
was also instrumental in selecting a variety of field sites.6
HIPLEX was initiated in 1973 when the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) assigned to the Bureau of Reclamation the responsi-
bility for mounting an experimental program to test scientific con-
cepts for augmenting precipitation in the High Plains. The $1 million
first appropriated for HIPLEX in fiscal year 1974 has grown to about
$4 million in fiscal year 1977, each recent year's appropriation also in-
cluding a congressional write-in which has increased OMB's pro-
gramed budget.7 About 80 percent of the fiscal year 1977 budget has
been for contracted research and 20 percent for in-house management
and support. Universities received 29 percent of the contracted research
funds, private firms were awarded 81 percent, and 20 percent went to
State and Federal agencies.8 Table 9 is a funding breakdown of fiscal
year 1977 HIPLEX funds by function, expressed in percentage of the
total HIPLEX budget.
Table 9. — Fiscal year 1977 HIPLEX funding breakdown by function
Function : Percent
Field operations 44. 1
Analysis 28. 7
Management, planning, design, data management 22.5
►Social, legal, and environmental studies (augmentation to State sup-
ported activities) • 4.7
Total 100.0
a Silverman. Bernard A . "HIPLEX : An Overview." Sixth Conference on Planned and In-
advertent Wenther Modification. American Meteorological Society. Champaign-Urbana, 111.,
Oct 10-18, 1077. p. 311.
* U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation, "High Plains Cooperative Pro-
gram ; Progress and Planning Report No. 2," Denver. March 1976, p. 3.
G Silverman, "HIPLEX : An Overview," 1977, p. 311.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid., pp. 311-312.
259
University of North Dakota radar used under contract in the High Plains Coop-
erative Program (HIPLEX) of Project Sky water. (Courtesy of the Bureau of
Reclamation.)
260
HIPLEX is envisioned as a 5- to 7-year program, running through
about 1982. Earliest attention has been given to the site at Miles City,
Mont., where seeding was first conducted during 1976, though pre-
liminary studies and measurements of cloud properties have also been
underway at the other two sites. The following accomplishments should
be noted : 9
1. Field facilities and research teams have been established at the
three field sites : Miles City, Mont. ; Goodland, Kans. ; and Big Spring,
Tex.
2. Active participation and cost-sharing with the States is underway.
3. Major equipment systems have been installed and tested.
4. Agricultural, economic, and environmental assessment studies are
underway in all three areas.
5. Experimental designs and data processing and analysis proce-
dures have been developed.
The experimental design for HIPLEX consists of two components —
an 'atmospheric effort and a socioeconomic and environmental effort.
Experimental components are divided into three overlapping phases,
which are consistent with sequential scientific efforts. In a fourth
phase the developed technology is to be transferred to applicable areas
in the High Plains region.10 The details of this four-phase design and
tentative dates associated with the overall schedule are shown in
figure 7.
9 U.S. Department of the Interior, "High Plains Cooperative Program ; Progress and Plan-
ning Report No. 2," p. 5.
' 10 Ackerman, Bernice, G. L. Achtemeier, H. Appleman, Stanley A. Changnon, Jr., F. A.
Huff, G. M. Morgan, Paul T. Schickedanz, and Richard G. Semonin, "Design of the High
Plains Experiment with Specific Focus on Phase 2, Single Cloud Experiment," Illinois State
Water Survey, final report on Hiplex design project to Bureau of Reclamation, contract
14-06-D-7197. Urbana, 111., June 30, 1976, p. 7.
261
Year
1973
74
75
77
COMPONENTS OF HIPLEX - RAINFALL ENHANCEMENT
Phase Atmospheric
Phase 1
Exploratory
Studies
73
79
82-85
83,86
86-91
Phase 2
Single-Cloud
Rain
Modification
Experiment
Phase 3
Area Rain
Modification
Experiment
Phase 4
Establish
• rain characteristics
•cloud characteristics
• seeding technologies
•measurement techniques
•reasonable hypotheses
Phase 2
Modification Hypotheses
Formulated
Pre-POCE:
•test of hypotheses
•field test of seeding
techniques
• develop physical/
statistical design
Sharpen hypotheses and
select for experiment
Socio-Economic
& Environmental
Delineate
•political attitudes
• economic models
•iegal requirements
•downwind impact
•ecological impacts
•undesirable atmospheric
impacts
Monitor Impacts
and
*
I
Proof of Concept Experiment:
Semi-isolated Clouds
•monitor physical changes
in clouds
•monitor precipitation
• continuous evaluation -
physical/statistical
•conclude when design
criteria are met
Evaluate
Phase 3
Hypothesis Developed
t
Monitor Impacts
Develop physical/statistical
design
Launch experiments
Perform continuous evaluation
Re-define initial hypothesis
Conclude when design criteria
achieved
1
and
Evaluate Benefits and
Disbenefits
Transfer of Technology
to High Plains states
and Other Users
Figure 7. — Flow of experimental effort in HIPLEX, showing tentative schedule
through 1991. (From Bernard A. Silverman, 1977, private communication.)
262
University of Wyoming instrumented cloud physics aircraft. (Courtesy of the
Bureau of Reclamation.)
HIPLEX is primarily a Skywater activity ; however, it also includes
the integrated research and supporting efforts of State agencies, local
groups, and other Federal agencies. Field research and analyses are to
be conducted primarily through contracts with private firms and uni-
versities, and the project is closely coordinated with related research
sponsored by the National Science Foundation and the Department of
Commerce. In order to develop optimum water augmentation poten-
tial, pertinent State and local organizations in the High Plains have
joined with the Bureau in planning, funding, and implementing this
broad research program which is designed to accomplish the
following : 11
1. Develop and test more productive seeding methods and evaluate
results.
2. Resolve the remaining cloud dynamics and precipitation physics
uncertainties on seeding effects.
3. Help prepare public weather modification backgrounds and local
expertise and establish working relations among concerned non-Fed-
eral entities.
4. Assess the actual economic value of cloud seeding and the possible
social and ecological impacts.
Anticipated overall costs for State cooperation and cost-sharing in
HIPLEX is estimated to be about $3 million. This contribution
amounts to 10 to 15 percent of the total HIPLEX research budget,
11 U.S. Department of the Interior, "High Plains Cooperative Program ; Progress and
Planning Report No. 2," pp. 3-5.
263
since the total Federal portion of the project is projected at about $20
million.12
HIPLEX cooperative agreements for cost-sharing and field research
support have been negotiated with the States.13 as shown in table 10.
Funding provided by some of these States and by the Bureau of Re-
clamation from fiscal year 1974: through fiscal year 1978 (estimated) is
shown in table 11.
TABLE 10.— HIPLEX COST-SHARING AND FIELD RESEARCH AGREEMENTS WITH STATES (FROM U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF INTERIOR, HIGH PLAINS COOPERATIVE PROGRAM, PROGRESS AND PLANNING REPORT NO. 2.)
Field site States Date signed
Miles City, Mont Montana... Aug. 25, 1974.
Goodland, Kans.. Kansas, Colorado, Nebraska May 29, 1974 (tristate).
Big Spring, Tex Texas Oct. 30, 1974.
TABLE 11.— SUMMARY OF HIPLEX FUNDS PROVIDED BY STATES AND BY THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, FISCAL
YEAR 1974 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 1978 (ESTIMATED) »
State funds Bureau of
Reclamation
Fiscal years Kansas Montana Texas Totals funds
19f4 $6,000 0 0 $6,000 $1,250,000
1975 100,000 0 $25,000 125,000 1,821,000
1976 plus transition quarter 100, 000 0 81, 500 181, 500 3, 482, 000
1977 100,000 $25,000 65,000 190,000 4,110.000
1978 (estimate) 100,000 25,000 75,000 200,000 4,000,000
Total 406,000 50,000 246,500 702,500 14,663,000
i Private communication from James L. Kerr, Washington representative, Office of Atmospheric Water Resources, Bureau
of Reclamation. November 1977.
The Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project (SCPP)
This cooperative precipitation augmentation research project is
being initiated under the auspices of Project Skywater and several
State agencies in the northern Sierra Nevada Mountain Range of
California and Nevada. Cooperation with commercial cloud seeding
operators, whose efforts in this region have been funded for several
decades by west coast utility companies, is expected to be a unique part
of the project.
The Sierra project began in 1972 with preliminary planning and
discussions. Research projects along the crest of the Rocky Moun-
tains and in the Sierra Nevada have shown the possibility of increased
snowfall and consequent streamflow enhancement through seeding cer-
tain types of weather systems. Commercial projects in the Sierra have
reported consistent 5 to 8 percent streamflow increases. The Sierra
project is intended to investigate the physical basis for the reported in-
creases and the feasibility of developing a more precise technology
for snowfall enhancement for this region.14
The Bureau of Reclamation and the State of California agreed to
pursue a research program in the Sierra Nevada in 1973 and jointly
™ Ibid., p. 10.
13 Ibid., p. 9.
14 U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. "A Status Report : The Sierra
Cooperative Pilot Project "(with excerpts from 'Weather Modification Design for Stream-
now Augmentation in the Northern Sierra Nevada." an initial study by MAB Associates,
San Ramon, Calif.), U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, February 1977, p. 1.
264
funded a contract for an assessment of potential environmental effects
that needed study. Public meetings were held in California and Nevada
during 1974 to solicit comments on the proposed project. Another con-
tract, funded in May 1975, led to publication of a project design report
in December 1976. In August 1975 the California Department of Water
Resources withdrew as a financial partner in the project, owing to re-
orientation of priorities and redirection of manpower and funds
toward other water projects. The department continues to provide
available information needed for development of the project and mon-
itors its progress.
Two studies on likely social and environmental effects of incremental
snowpack increases on highways and public transportation were com-
pleted in 1976 by two other agencies of the State of California, the
California Highway Patrol and the California Department of Trans-
portation. A survey of individual citizens and organizational repre-
sentatives on attitudes and concerns about seeding by winter cloud
seeding was also conducted in 1976. 15
The preliminary experimental design notes that storms in the Sierra
cooperative project can be classified into two types and recommends
that the project should attempt to modify the storm types with sep-
arate objectives.
The orographic (westerly) storms should be seeded to increase the efficiency
of the storm, thus augmenting the amount of precipitation resulting from these
systems. The procedure would be to seed the storms at light seeding rates to
avoid overseeding. Seeding would be done with surface seeding generators and,
under certain circumstances, with airborne seeding generators.
It was recommended that the convective storms (southerly) be seeded to in-
crease precipitation at higher, colder elevations, primarily through redistribu-
tion, providing a greater total precipitation for storage in the snowpack. These
storms will be seeded heavily, with the object of altering the distribution of pre-
cipitation with respect to altitude, thus increasing the snowpack. In addition to
seeding the general orographic background of these storms by surface generators,
the pilot program would seed the updraft areas of the imbedded convective cells
heavily with high-output airborne generators.18
The specific meteorological hypotheses to be tested by the Sierra ex-
periment are that : 17
1. Seeding will increase the average precipitation on treated sample
events as compared to the untreated events.
2. Seeding will increase the average elevation of maximum pre-
cipitation on treated sample events as compared to untreated events.
3. Seeding will increase the average duration of precipitation and/
or the rate of precipitation on treated sample events as compared with
the untreated events.
It is intended that the design and evaluation of the SCPP will be a
continuing process over a period of 7 years, constituting a major
feature in the step-by-step research in the pilot project.18 The primary
hypotheses of the program as well as physical parameters which
accompany successful or unsuccessful events, will be tested in the
SCPP evaluation. Basic parameters to be tested statistically are : 19
1. The average precipitation accumulation.
2. The elevation of the maximum precipitation band.
15 Ibid., pp. 1-3.
16 Ibid., p. 15.
« Ibid.
"U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. "SCPP Continuing Dosij;n
Contract." Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project Newsletter. No. 6. May 1977. Denver. Colo., p. 2.
19 U.S. Department of the Interior, "A Status Report : The Sierra Cooperative Pilot Proj-
ect," 1977, p. 27.
265
3. The average total storm duration, the average duration of pre-
cipitation during the first and last days of the storm, and the average
rate of precipitation.
The regions that are expected to be affected in the Sierra project
are shown in figure 8. Region 1 is the primary area of effect ; region
2 is the downwind area recommended for monitoring extra- area effects ;
and region 3, situated below 1,220 meters (4,000 ft.) elevation in the
American River basin, is intended to provide real-time precipitation
data as input for the declaration of an experimental unit and to
provide better definition of the precipitation distribution within the
drainage basin.20
40
40.0
39.5
39.0
38.5
38.0
KILOMETERS
40 MILES
VIRGINIA
MTS. /\\
REGION 2
EXTRA AREA EFFECTS
^ VIRGINIA
.CARSON VN RANGE
GRANGE $ RANGE
LAKEA 'A P|NE
TAHOEA A NUT
* >
121.0
120.5
120.0
LONGITUDE
119.5
119.0
Figure 8. — Map of the Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project region, showing the three
geographical areas in the project (see text). (From Bure iu of Reclamation,
Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project, status report, February 1977.)
2U Ibid., pp. 24-25.
266
The planning and design phase of the Sierra project continues, and
during the winter of 19 f 6-77, field tests were conducted that were
necessary for design of field operations. During the 1977-78 winter sea-
son collection of field data under prerandomized seeding conditions
should be completed ; operating procedures will be tested and refined ;
equipment will be installed, tested, and calibrated; concepts for co-
ordinating with operating programs in the area will be developed;
transport and diffusion studies will continue; and changes in design
will continue as a result of the increased knowledge acquired from the
research of the previous year.21 If the preceding activities have been
accomplished successfully and weather conditions permit, randomized
seeding will begin in the 1978-79 season. From historic storm patterns
it has been estimated that 5 to 7 years of randomized seeding will be
necessary to obtain a data base suitable for confirmation of the ex-
pected increases at a significant level. During this period monitoring
programs and environmental studies will be designed and implemented.
There will be continued dialog with concerned officials and the general
public in the project area, and hopefully many answers will be ob-
tained tu societal, economic, and environmental questions.22
Drought mitigation assistance
Drought emergency relief was requested by the Governors of a num-
ber of Western States during the summer of 1971. In partial response
to this request, the President's Office of Emergency Preparedness di-
rected the Bureau to conduct emergency precipitation stimulation
operations in Arizona, Oklahoma, and Texas. Skywater personnel
have also provided scientific consulting services for rain augmentation
programs in Lebanon, Brazil, India, Tasmania, and Jamaica.23
A recent program, not part of Project Skywater, was administered
by the Bureau of Reclamation, under which grants were given to
States to support weather modification activities undertaken to miti-
gate impacts of the 1976-77 drought. Temporary authorities to the
Secretary of the Interior to facilitate various emergency actions were
provided by Public Law 95-18, amended by Public Law 95-107,
enacted April 7, 1977, and August 17, 1977, respectively. Authority
was granted to appropriate $100 million for a program which included
short-term actions to increase water supplies. Funds made available
were to be used to repair, replace, or improve affected water-supply
facilities and to establish a water bank of available water for rehabili-
tation. The Bureau implemented the act, publishing rules for emer-
gency loans, grants, and deferrals under the Emergency Drought Act
of 1977 in the Federal Register.24 Procedures were established under
.sections 423.18 and 423.20 of these rules for State water resource agen-
cies to apply for nonreimbursable funds for studies and other actions
to augment water supplies. Bequests wore received during the period
of availability from six States for funds to support weather modifica-
tion activities. Table 12 shows the amount of funds approved for each
State for weather modification projects under this provision.25
21 Ibid., p. 47.
22 Ibid.
23 Kahan. Archie M.. testimony in : U.S. Congress. House of Representatives, Committee
on Science and Technology. Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere. "Weath-
er Modification." hearings. 04th Congress. 2d session, June 15-18, 1977. Washington, D.C.,
U.S. Government Printing Office. 1976. p. 194.
■* Federal Register, vol. 42, No. 72. Thursday, Apr. 14, 1977, pp. 19609 -19613.
^ Private communication from James L. Kerr. Washington Representative, Office of At-
mospheric Water Resources, Bureau of Reclamation, November 1977.
267
Table 12. — Funds provided for States for weather modification- projects by the
Bureau of Reclamation, under provisions of the Emergency Drought Act of
1977.
Colorado $600,000
California 300,000
Kansas 300,000
Nevada 232,720
North Dakota 186,133
Utah 553, 500
Total 2, 172, 353
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Introduction and general
Under its Research Applied to National Needs (RANN) program,
the National Science Foundation (NSF) has in recent years developed
improved capabilities to stimulate research efforts immediately and
directly related to problems of society. This program, which dealt pri-
marily with problem-oriented research, focussed scientific and tech-
nological resources on selected problems of national importance in an
attempt to assist in their solution in a timely and practical manner.
RANN's areas of emphasis included the major category of environ-
mental programs, under which most of the NSF-sponsored research
in weather modification had until recently been located.26
The NSF program in weather modification supports a broad range
of research, extending across the disciplines of economic, social, politi-
cal, legal, environmental, mathematical, and physical sciences.27 The
overall goal of the program is "to establish the concept of weather
modification as a tool to help fulfill societal needs,-' and, to accomplish
this goal, the program supports research on the following five program
objectives: 28
1. To establish the feasibility of, and improve the technology for,
mitigating the undesirable effects of selected weather hazards.
2. To delineate the cause, extent, and impact of inadvertent weather
modification and to subsequently develop ways to use land and energy
resources to achieve more desirable responses in weather and climate.
3. To develop an improved capability to design, perform, and evalu-
ate weather modification experiments.
4. To investigate the impact of weather modification on society.
5. To develop specific applications of weather modification to in-
crease agricultural production.
Table 13 is a summary of weather modification research funding and
projected funding from fiscal year 1976 through fiscal year 1978 for the
National Science Foundation.
26 In the reorganization of the RANN Directorate in the NSF to the Applied Science and1
Research Applications (ASRA) Directorate, effective February 1978, the NSF weather modi-
fication program was transferred to the basic research Astronomical, Atmospheric, Earth,
and Ocean Sciences (AAEO) Directorate. Division of Atmospheric Sciences.
27 Downie. Currie S. and Richard A. Dirks, National Science Foundation weather modi-
fication program, papers presented at the second WMO Scientific Conference on Weather
Modification, Boulder, Colo., Aug. 2-6, 1976. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva,
Switzerland, p. 557.
28 Ibid.
268
TABLE 13.— WEATHER MODIFICATION FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 1976 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 1978 FOR THE
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION '
[In thousands of dollars)
Fiscal year—
iy/b
197T
1977
1978
Precipitation modification
532
0
681
150
Fop and cloud modification
0
88
110
0
Hail suppression
3, 081
488
2,950
1,180
Social, economic, lepal, and environmental
24I8
60
287
150
Inadvertent modification
1,153
101
629
600
Support and services
1,032
373
1,045
170
6,216
1,110
5, 702
2,250
1 From Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. ICAS 21— fiscal year 1978, p. 94.
2 Includes technology assessment of hail suppression.
The RANN weather modification program dealt with a number
of specific, critical research topics and was dedicated to development of
improved technology in support of societal needs, transfer of this tech-
nology to potential users, and exploration of the impacf of weather
modification on society ; however, the program is not all encompassing.
In addition to the RANN-supported research, the NSF supported
weather modification through its basic research program in meteorol-
ogy and through the atmospheric research facilities at the National
Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) at Boulder, Colo.29
The NSF weather modification program is coordinated with weather
modification programs of other Federal agencies through the Inter-
departmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS) Panel on
Weather Modification and through numerous and frequent contacts
with representatives of the other Federal agencies. In 1975 an NSF
Weather Modification Advisory Panel was formed, composed of rep-
resentatives from the Department of the Interior (Buearu of Reclama-
tion), the Department of Commerce (National Oceanic and Atmos-
pheric Administration) , the academic community, commercial weather
modifiers, and industry. The Panel was formed to provide technical
advice to the NSF program manager for weather modification and to
assist in coordinating the program with other agencies.30 As part of the
concerted effort throughout the executive branch to eliminate advisory
panels, the NSF Weather Modification Advisory Panel was recently
abolished.
Public Law 85-510 of July 11, 1958, directed the NSF "to initiate
and support a program of study, research, and evaluation in the field of
weather modification." 31 The Foundation promptly responded in es-
tablishing the new program, then within its broader program for at-
mospheric sciences, and expended $1,141,000 for research and evalua-
tion in weather modification in fiscal year 1959. 32 In designing the pro-
gram the advice and assistance of outstanding scientists and engineers
were sought, and an Advisory Panel for Weather Modification was ap-
20 Ibid.
30 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences, ICAS 20-FY77. n. 9.r>.
31 See earlier section of this chapter for discussion of this and other Federal legislation
on weather modification.
32 National Science Foundation, "Weather Modification"; first annual report for fiscal
year ended June 30, 1959, NSF 60-24, p. 3.
269
pointed. In an early report to the Director of the NSF, the Chairman
of the Advisory Panel, Dr. Reuben G. Gustavson, stated : 33
Placing this important field of research under the aegis of the National Science
foundation has given rise to a new hope and confidence that the instability fac-
ors in regard to size and time of support will be removed. This is already bring-
ng young imaginative workers into the field. The rate of advance will to a large
neasure depend upon the quality of the trained scientists attracted to the prob-
.eni. If good scientists are to be attracted into the program, the Foundation must
be particularly concerned about the financial stability of the program.
The effect of Public Law 85-510 was to make the NSF the Federal
lead agency in weather modification, since there were research pro-
grams underway in a number of other agencies. Historically the NSF
program has provided the largest measure of Federal support to all
aspects of weather modification research over the years since establish-
ment of its program. When Public Law 90-407 of July 18, 1968,
amended the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, the specific
mandate for NSF to support a weather modification program and the
attendant lead agency role were effectively repealed. The further re-
quirements, established earlier by Public Law 85-510, that activities
in weather modification in the United States be reported to the NSF
and that the Foundation should publish an annual report to the Con-
gress, were also terminated with the passage of Public Law 90-407.
During the years when NSF was lead agency for weather modification,
10 annual reports were published, the last one covering fiscal year
1968.34
Following passage of the 1968 law, the NSF continued to support
basic and applied research in weather modification under the broad
authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 as amended
by Public Law 90— 1-07. About one-third of the total Federal support
for weather modification has been provided by the NSF.
When the Research Applied to National Needs (RANN) Direc-
torate was established within the Foundation in 1971 "to bring the
resources of science and technology to bear on selected important na-
tional problems,5' 35 most of the weather modification research was
transferred from the basic atmospheric science program to RANN.
While nearly all of this research was managed under RANN
by the Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology, two major studies were sponsored by RANN's Division
of Exploratory Research and Technology Assessment, which "sup-
ports research and assessment to provide greater visibility to the longer
range social, environmental, and economic impacts of new technology
applications and to identify and analyze emerging national problems
that may be avoided or ameliorated by science and technology." 36
The first of these two technology assessment studies was initiated in
1971 in response to a request from the Interdepartmental Committee
for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS) to explore the feasibility of apply-
ing technology assessment concepts to planned weather modification
operational projects. ICAS suggested that the first project for such a
technology assessment might be the planned project of the Bureau of
33 Itrd.
34 National Science Foundation. "Weather Modification: Tenth Annual Report for Fiscal
Yenr Ended June 30, 1968." NSF 69-18. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,
1969. 141 pp.
30 National Science Foundation. "Twentv-sixth Annual Report, for Fiscal Year 1976,"
NSF 77-1. Washington D.C.. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1977. p. So.
36 National Science Foundation. "Guide to Programs : Fiscal Year 1978," Washington,
DC, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977, p. "51.
270
Reclamation to augment the flow of the Colorado River by seeding
orographic clouds to increase snowpack in the Upper Colorado River
Basin, since the pilot experiment was already underway in the San
Juan Mountain Range and the Secretary of the Interior needed in-
formation to make a decision on implementation in the near future.37
The contract for the assessment was funded and monitored by NSF,
the Stanford Research Institute being selected to undertake the study,
with assistance from the University of California at Davis and a num-
ber of consultants. The final report was published in 1974.38
The second major study was an extensive technology assessment of
hail suppression in the United States. This project was initiated in
August 1975 and became known as the Technology Assessment of
the Suppression of Hail (TASH). The NSF grant was to the Univer-
sity of Illinois; however, a number of other institutions and individ-
uals were involved in the study through subcontracts or consulting
agreements. Total funding for the 18-month project included $290,500
from NSF and $60,000 from the State of Illinois.39 The final report
of the TASH study was published in April 1977.40
Table II is a listing of awards in weather modification research by
the Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Technology
for fiscal year 1973 through the 1976 transition quarter. The XSF
weather modification program has been divided into five major areas
under which the numerous research projects have been categorized.
These areas, corresponding to the five program objectives stated
earlier, are : (1) weather hazard mitigation studies on such phenomena
as hail, thunderstorms, lightning, and tornadoes and an attempt to
prevent or lessen damage from such storms; (2) weather modification
technology development ; designed to improve methods for modifying
the weather and of evaluating results of weather modification efforts;
(3) inadvertent weather modification investigations to delineate the
cause, extent, and impact of urban-industrial influences, such as heat,
moisture, aerosols, and surface roughness, on the weather; (I) socie-
tal utilization activities which relate the impact of weather on man.
provide goal orientation, and achieve the societal interface for suc-
cessful weather modification applications; and (5) an agricultural
weather modification program which includes developing techniques
for exerting influence on agricultural systems at critical points during
the planting, growing, and harvesting seasons in order to expand agri-
cultural production.41 Each of these major program divisions will be
discussed in the following sections.
37 Weisbecker. Leo W. (compiler). "The Impacts of Snow Enhancement; Technology
Assessment of Winter Orographic Snowpack Augmentation in the Upper Colorado River
Basin." Norman, Okla., University of Oklahoma Press, 1974, p. v.
wIbld., 024 pp. (A summary of the report was also published separately: Weisbecker.
Leo W.. "Snowpack. Cloud Seeding, and the Colorado River ; Technology Assessment of
Weather Modification." Norman, Okla.. University of Oklahoma Press. 1974*. 80 pp.)
39 Changnon. Stanley A., Jr.. Ray Jay Davis. Barbara C. Farhar. J. Eugene Haas. J. Lore-
ena Ivens. Martin V. Jones. Donald A. Klein. Dean Mann, Griffith M. Morgan. Jr.. Steven T.
Sonka. Earl R. Swanson. C Robert Ta.vlor. and Jon Van Blokiand "Hail Suppression ; Im-
pacts and Issues." Urbana. 111.. Illinois State Water Survey. April 1977. pp. i-iii.
40 Ibid.. 432 pp.. (A summary of the report was also published in 1977: Farhar. Bar-
bara ('.. Stanley A. Changnon. Jr.. Earl R. Swanson, Ray J. Davis, and J. Eugene Haas,
"Hail Suppression and Society," Urbana, 111.. Illinois State Water Survev, June 1977,
2:3 pp.)
41 Federal Council for Selenee and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences, ICAS 20-FY77. p. 95.
271
Table 14 —Summary of Weathe- Modification Research Awards by NSF/RANN for Fiscal Year 1973 through 1976 Transitional
Quarter. (Data from Annual Summaries of Awards, RANN, Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology.)
Principal investigator/
institution
Title
Effective date
Duration
(months)
Amount
FISCAL YEAR 1973 AWARDS
Firor, John W., National Center for
Atmospheric Research, Boulder,
Colo.
Jayaweera, K.O.L.F., University of
Alaska, College, Alaska.
Sikdar, Dhirendra N., University of
Wisconsin-Madison, Madison,
Wis.
Boone, Larry M., Department of
Agriculture, Wash ngton, D.C.
Taubenfeld, Howard J., Southern
Methodist University, Dallas, Tex.
Haas, J. E., University of Colorado,
Boulder, Colo.
Corrin, Myron L., Colorado State
UnrVersity, Fort Collins, Colo.
Grant, Lewis 0., Colorado State Uni-
versity, Fort Collins, Colo.
Barchet, Wm. Richard, University
of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison,
Wis.
McQuigg, James D., University of
Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, Mo.
Corrin, Myron L., Colorado State Uni-
versity, Fort Collins, Colo.
Warburton, Joseph A., Desert Re-
search I nstitute, Reno, Nev.
Hobbs, Peter V., University of Wash-
ington, Seattle, Wash.
Veal,' Donald L., University of Wyo-
ming, Laramie, Wyo.
Changnon, Stanley A. University of
Illinois-Urbana, Urbana, III.
Steele, Roger L., Desert Research
I nstituta. Reno, Nev.
Plooster, Myron N., University of
Denver, Denver, Colo.
Changnon, Stanley A., Jr., University
of Illinois-Urbana, Urbana, III.
Peterson, D. F., Utah State Univer-
sity, Logan, Utah.
Weickmann, Helmut K., National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin-
istration, Boulder, Colo.
Moore, Charles, B., New Mexico
Institute of Mining and Technolo-
gy, Socorro, N. Mex.
Braham, Roscoe R., Jr., University
of Chicago, Chicago, III.
Chessin, Henry, State University at
Albany, Albany, N.Y.
Uthe, Edward E., Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, Calif.
Klein, Donald A., Colorado State
University, Fort Collins, Colo.
Auer. August H., Jr., University of
Wyoming, Laramie, Wyo.
Ochs, Harry T., Ill, University of
Illinois-Urbana, Urbana, III.
FISCAL YEAR 1974 AWARDS
Anderson, C. E., University of
Wisconsin.
Auer, August H.
Wyoming.
University of
Contract for the management, opera- Aug. 1, 1972 12 $2,700,000
tion, and maintenance of the Na-
tional Center for Atmospheric Re-
search (funds for national hail re-
search experiment program).
Prevention of ice fog formation by ;n- Sept. 1, 1972 12 17, 600
ducing cloud cover— Feasibility
study in Fairbanks.
Study of the features and energy Oct. 1, 1972 12 96,900
budgets of northeastern Colorado
hailstones.
Economic and institutional con- Oct. 15, 1972 12 65,000
siderations of suppressing hail.
Study group on the societal conse- Nov. 1, 1972 12 64,400
quences of weather modification.
A comparative analysis of publicsup- Dec. 1, 1972 20 60,700
port of and resistance to weather
modification projects.
Heterogeneous ice nuclei. .. do 12 49,800
Precipitation augmentation from Jan. 1, 1973 12 281,400
orographically induced clouds and
cloud systems.
Precipitation process modification Feb. 15, 1973 12 55, 600
through ice nucleus deactivation.
Weather modification management do 12 42,000
guidelines.
Laboratory cloud simulation to sup- Mar. 1, 1973 12 112,600
port weather modification research
and field programs.
Silver iodide seeding rates and snow- do 12 80,100
pack augmentation.
Physical evaluation of cloud seeding Apr. 1, 1973 15 182,000
techniques for modifying orogra-
phic snowfall (the Cascade project).
Development of leaf-derived ice do 12 70,000
nuclei for weather modification.
Design of a hail suppression experi- do 12 142,200
ment in Illinois.
Sequence effects of heterogeneous Apr. 15, 1973 12 71, 000
nucleation.
M.crophysics— Diffusion interaction do 39,900
in ice nuclei plumes.
Studies of urban effects on rainfall do 12 211,400
and severe weather.
Workshop on inadvertent weather May 1, 1973 12 29,900
modification.
Installation and maintenance of May 22, 1973 6 39,033
ground network for national hail
research experiment.
Origin and role of electricity in clouds. June 1, 1973 12 170, 800
Inadvertent weather modification in do 12 275,000
the St. Louis area.
Development of cloud seeding tech- do 12 33, 500
nology utilizing modified silver
iodide structures.
Lidar— Radiometric study of urban do 12 54,100
atmospheric processes related to
climatic modification.
Microbiological impacts of silver July 1, 1973 12 67,600
iodide used in weather modifica-
tion.
Modification of convective cloud do 12 61, 300
activity by an urban area.
2-dimensional cloud modeling— July 1, 1972 12 117,700
Application to urban effects on
precipitation.
Study of the features and energy Oct. 1, 1973 12 100, 000
budgets of northeastern Colorado
hailstorms.
Modification of convective cloud Apr. 1, 1974 12 132,000
activity.
272
Table 14. Summary of Weather Modification Research Awards by NSF/RANN, for Fiscal Year 1973 through 1976 Transitional
Quarter, (Data from Annual Summaries of Awards, RANN, Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology.)—Continued
Principal investigator/ Duration
institution Title Effective date (months) Amount
FISCAL YEAR 1974 AWARDS— Continued
Barchet, William R., University of Precipitation process modification Feb. 15, 1973
Wisconsin. through ice nucleus deactivation.
Boone, Larry M., U.S. Department Economic and institutional consid- Oct. 1, 1973
of Agriculture. erations of suppressing hail.
Braham, Roscoe R., Jr., University Inadvertent weather modification in Apr. 1, 1974
of Chicago. the St. Louis area.
Changnon, Stanley A., Jr., University Studies of urban effects on rainfall do
of Illinois. and severe weather.
Design of a hail suppression experi- June 1, 1973
ment in Illinois.
Chessin, Henry, State University of Development of cloud seeding tech- do
N.Y. nology utilizing modified silver
iodide structures.
Chisholm, John P., Sierra Nevada An accurate and inexpensive air- July 1, 1974
Corp. borne windfinding system.
Corrin, Myron L., Colorado State Heterogeneous ice nuclei develop- Oct. 1, 1973
University. ment.
Davis, Briant L., South Dakota Chemical complexing of silver iodide- Sept. 1, 1972
School of Mines and Technology. alkali iodide aerosols prepared for
cloud seeding purposes.
Dennis, Arnett S., South Dakota Numerical analysis of proposed hail Sept. 1, 1971
School of Mines and Technology. suppression concepts.
Firor, John W., National Center for National hail research experiment.. July 1, 1973
Atmospheric Research.
Fujita, Theodore T., University of Basic research on tornadoes relevant Sept. 1, 1971
Chicago. to their modification.
Fukuta, Norihiko, University of Development of cloud seeding gen- July 15, 1973
Denver. erators for biodegradeable organic
ice nuclei.
Grant, Lewis 0., Colorado State Extended area effects from local Mar. 1, 1974
University. weather modification.
Cloud simulation and aerosol lab- Apr. 4, 1974
oratory.
Haas, J. Eugene, Human Ecology A comparative analysis of public re- Aug. 1, 1974
Research Services, Inc. action to weather modification
projects.
Hobbs, Peter V., University of Orographic snowfall in the Cascade Apr. 1, 1973
Washington. project.
Klein, Donald A.( Colorado State Management of silver iodide used in July 1, 1974
University. weather modification: Develop-
ment in microbial threshold tox-
icity criteria.
Little, Gordon C, National Oceanic Operating two dual-Doppler radars June 1, 1974
and Atmospheric Administration. in conjunction with the 1974
summer operations.
McQuigg, James D., University of Weather modification guidelines Feb. 15, 1974
Missouri.
Moore, Charles B., New Mexico Lightning protection systems and May 15, 1974
Institute of Mining and Tech- thunderstorm electrification,
nology.
Mordy, Wendell A., Center for the A program of social science research Oct. 1, 1973
Future. coordination and goal evaluation
for Metromex.
Ochs, Harry T., Ill, University of Supportive modeling of urban effects July 1, 1974..
Illinois. on precipitation.
Plooster, Myron N., University of Microphysics — Diffusion interaction Apr. 15, 1974
Denver. in ice nuclei plumes
Schaefer, Vincent J., State University Second inadvertent weather modifi- April 1, 1974
of New York cation workshop.
Schickendanz, Paul T., Illinois State Climatic alterations in the Great June 1, 1974
Water Survey. Plains due to widespread irriga-
tion.
Simpson, Joanne, University of Evaluation and design of weather July 1, 1974
Virginia. modification experiments.
Steele, Roger L., University of Sequence effects of heterogeneous April 15, 1974
Nevada nucleation.
Taubenfeld, Howard J., Southern Study group on the societal conse- Oct. 1, 1973
Methodist University. quences of weather modification.
Veal, Donald L., University of Development of leaf-derived ice Apr. 1, 1973
Wyoming. nuclei for weather modification.
Warburton, Joseph A., University of Silver iodide seeding rates and snow- Mar. 1, 1973
Nevada. pack augmentation.
FISCAL YEAR 1975 AWARDS
Inadvertent weather modification:
Auer, August H., University of Modification of convective cloud activ- Apr. 1, 1975
Wyoming. ity by an urban area.
Braham, Roscoe R., Jr., Uni- Inadvertent weather modification in do
versity of Chicago. the St. Louis area.
12
t^s finn
$JJ, ouu
15
54, 000
243, 000
12
237, 500
12
33, 500
12
33, 500
12
44, 400
12
49, 800
24
103,900
24
86, 300
12
2, 000, 000
OA
55 400
12
106, 900
9
250, 000
6
4, 000
2
22, 800
15
182, 000
0
3
16 900
1 0
in nnn
1U, UUU
12
42, 000
1 0
1JU, uuu
3
15,000
9
/ 0, UUU
12
39, S00
24
it nnn
jj, UUU
24
55, 500
12
50, 000
12
71,000
12
60, 800
12
70, 000
12
80, 100
10
134,300
12
261,000
273
Table 14. Summary of Weather Modification Research Awards by NSF/RANN, for Fiscal Year 1973 through 1976 Transitional
Quarter. (Data fiom Annual Summaries of Awards, RANN, Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology.)—Continued
Principal investigator/ Duration
institution Title Effective date (months) Amount
FISCAL YEAR 1975 AWARDS— Continued
Inadvertent weather modification— Continued
Chagnon, Stanley A., University Studies of urban effects on rainfall Apr. 1, 1975 12 $257,200
of Illinois. and severe weather.
Gossard, Earl E., National Dual-Doppler radar investigation of June 15, 1975 12 60,000
Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- wind flow patterns in Metromex.
ministration.
Ochs, Harry T., University of Numerical cloud modeling Apr. 1, 1975 10 63,400
lllinios.
Schickedanz, Paul T., Univer- Climatic alternations in the Great June 1, 1974 24 55,500
sity of lllinios. Plains due to widespread irriga-
tion.
Societal utilization:
Boone, Larry M., U.S. Depart- Economic and institutional consider- Oct. 1, 1973 15 54,500
ment of Agriculture. ations of suppressing hail.
Grant, Lewis O., Colorado State Extended area effects from local Dec. 1, 1974 12 280,000
University. weather modification.
Haas, J. Eugene Human Ecology A comparative analysis of public re- Oct. 1, 1974 12 76,000
Research Service. action to weather modification
projects.
Klein, Donald A., Colorado State Microbiological impacts of silver July 1, 1975 __ 12 46,600
University. iodide used in weather modifica-
tion.
McQuigg, James D., University Weather modification management Aug. 1, 1974. 14 41,000
of Missouri. guidelines.
Mordy, W. A., Center for the The importance of climate and July 1, 1974 15 87,000
Future. weather alterations to mankind.
Morgan, G. M., University of Design of a hail suppression experi- Nov. 1, 1974 12 67,800
Illinois. ment in lllinios.
Shaefer, Vincent J., State Uni- Second inadvertent weather modi- Apr. 1, 1974 12 33,000
versity of New York. fication workshop.
Taubenfeld, Howrad J., Southern Study group on the consequences of November 1974... 6 13,800
Methodist University. weather modification.
Weather hazard mitigation:
Atlas, David, National Center National hail research experiment... July 1975 12 2,130,000
for Atmospheric Research.
•Moore, Charles B.t New Mexico Lightning protection and thunder- June 1, 1975 12 130,000
Institute of Mining and Tech- storm electrification,
nology.
Weather modification systems:
Anderson, Charles E., Univer- Studies on the dynamics, micro- Jan. 1, 1975.. 12 96,000
sity of Wisconsin. physics, and forecasting of severe
local storms.
Chisholm, John P., Sierra fJe- An accurate and inexpensive air- July 1, 1974 9 44,400
vada Corp. borne windfinding system.
Davis, Briant L., Institute of Chemical ccmplexing of silver iodide- Sept. 1, 1972 24 103,900
Atmosphe ric Sciences. alkali iodide aerosols prepared for
cloud-seeding purposes.
Fukuta, Norihiko, University of Cloud-seeding generators for bio- July 15, 1974 12 100,400
Denver. degradable organic ice nuclei.
Grant, Lewis O., Colorado State Cloud simulation and aerosol lab- Nov. 1, 1974 12 18,000
University. oratory.
Little, Gordon C, National Oce- Dual-Doppler radar investigations of July 1, 1974 12 60,000
anic and Atmospheric Ad- wind fields in severe storms.
ministration.
Simpson, Joanne, University of Evaluation and design of weather do 12 50,000
Virginia. modification experiments.
FISCAL YEAR 1976 AWARDS
Improved weather modification
technology:
Fukuta, Norihiko, University of Development of cloud-seeding gen- Aug. 1, 1975 12 133, 100
Denver. erators for biodegradable organic
ice nuclei.
Gossard, Earl E., National Collection and processing of multiple May 15, 1976 14.5 135,000
Oceanic and Atmospheric Doppler radar data in NHRE.
Administration.
Grant, Lewis O. Colorado State Testing and calibration program for July 1, 1975 12 10,800
University. cloud-seeding materials, seeding
generators, and nucleus-observ-
ing instruments.
Simpson, Joanne, University Evaluaion and design of weather do 9 73,000
of Virginia. modification experiments.
Silver iodide tracing in south Florida do 12 15,000
Warburton, Joseph A., Denver Silver iodide seeding rates and do 6 49,900
Research Institute. snowpack augmentation.
Inadvertent weather modification:
Auer, August H., University of Lidar, acoustic sounder and radi- July 15, 1975 12 52,800
Wyoming. ometer investigation.
Modification of convective cloud Feb. 1, 1976 14 178, 700
activity by an urban area.
274
Table 14. Summary of Weather Modification Research Awards by NSF/RANN, for Fiscal Year 1973 through 1976 Transitional
Quarter. .(Data from Annual Summaries of Awards, RANN, Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology.)—Continued
Principal investigator/
institution
Title
Duration
Effective date (months) Amount
FISCAL YEAR 1976 AWARDS-Continued '
Inadvertent weather modification— Continued
Braham, Roscoe R., University Inadvertent weather modification in Feb. 1, 1976..
of Chicago. the St. Louis area.
Changnon, Stanley A., Uni- Studies of urban effects on rainfall ...do_
versity of Illinois. and severe weather.
Hobbs, Peter, University of Inadvertent weather modification by June 15, 1976.
Washington. effluents from coal-fired electric
powerplants.
Ochs, Harry T., University of Numerical cloud modeling: Applica- Feb. 1, 1976..
Illinois. tion to urban effects on precipita-
tion.
Saxena, V. K., University of Airborne mapping of urban plume of May 15, 1976.
Denver. St. Louis with a cloud condensa-
tion nuclei (CCN) spectrometer.
Social, legal, and economic impact of
weather modification:
Farhar, Barbara, Human Ecology A comparative analysis of public Dec. 1, 1975...
Research Services, Inc. response to weather modification.
Grant, Lewis 0., Colorado State A field experiment to test hypotheses ...do
University. of the reality, characteristic, and
magnitude of extended area effects
from weather modification.
Klein, Donald A., Colorado State Management of nucleating agents Oct. 1, 1975...
University. used in weather modification: De-
velopment of microbial threshold
toxicity criteria.
Weather hazard mitigation:
Veal, Donald, National Center National hal research experiment... Aug. 1, 1975..
for Atmospheric Research.
Weather modification in support of
agriculture:
Grant, Lewis 0., Colorado State An assessment of the present and July 1, 1975..
University. potential role in weather modifi-
cation in agricultural production.
Huff, Floyd A., University of Assessment of weather modifica- Nov. 1, 1975..
Illinois. tion in alleviating agricultural
water shortages during droughts.
14
14
24
14
12
15 82,000
11 215,709
12 2,361,000
18 71,000
FISCAL YEAR 1976 TRANSITIONAL
QUARTER AWARDS
I mproved weather modification tech-
nology:
Chisholm, John, Sierra Nevada
Corp.
Hallett, John, University of
Nevada.
Maki, Leroy R., University of
Wyoming.
Inadvertent weather modification:
Uthe, Edward E., Stanford Re-
search Inst.
Social, legal, and economic impact
of weather modification:
Lambright, W. Henry, Syra-
cuse Research Corp.
Weather hazard mitigation:
Auer, August H., University of
Wyoming.
Veal, Donald L., National Center
for Atmospheric Research.
An accurate and inexpensive air- Augus
borne wind measuring system.
An assessment of synoptic criteria ...do.
for ice multiplication in convective
clouds.
Ice nucleation induced by bacteria.. ...do.
1976.
Lidar and radiometric data analysis
of mixing levels, clouds, and
precipitation processes.
..do.
The utilization of weather modifica- September 1976.
tion technology: A State govern-
ment decisionmaking study.
The kinematics of thunderstorm August 1976
gust fronts relating to the mitiga-
tion of airport flight hazards.
National hail research experiment... July 1976
15
12
21
10
18 60, 400
12 56, 300
Weather hazard mitigation
Research supported by NSF in this category is pointed toward the
reduction of undesirable aspects of selected weather hazards. Although
the major effort has been in research on the reduction of hail damage,
research related to other severe weather phenomena lias included in-
vestigations on lightning protection, wind shear warning, and fog
hazard alleviation. The major project in weather hazard mitigation
275
in recent years has been the National Hail Research Experiment
(NHRE), which was initiated by the Foundation in 1971 "to assess
the potential for altering hail ... by cloud seeding' and determine the
extent to which beneficial modification can be accomplished effectively
on an operational basis." 42
The concept of a national hail suppression experiment grew out of
interest by U.S. scientists in hail suppression activities in the Soviet
Union in the 1960's and also from the 1965 recommendation of the
Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS) that
the Foundation, in collaboration with other Federal agencies, should
develop a plan for hail suppression research.43 As a first step in plan-
ning such a national effort, the NSF invited the National Center for
Atmospheric Research (NCAR) to cooperate in organizing the First
National Symposium on Hail Suppression, which was held at Dillon,
Colo., on October 14-15, 1965, under the chairmanship of Verner E.
Suomi.44
Arising from the Dillon conference was an NSF-sponsored Hail Sup-
pression Research Steering Committee, also chaired by Dr. Suomi,
which held a number of meetings in the years immediately following
and prepared a hail suppression test outline in 1968.45 Upon approval
of the outline by the ICAS, the NSF requested that a detailed plan
for a national experiment be developed by NCAR. A "Plan for the
Northeast Colorado Hail Experiment (NECHE)" was prepared by
NCAR 46 and approved by the ICAS in 1969. The NECHE plan called
for an intensive investigation into hailstorms and hail suppression to
be conducted over a 5-year period. After a few years of preliminary
investigations, the project was eventually renamed the National Hail
Research Experiment (NHRE) in 1971.
NHRE was one of seven proposed national projects in weather
modification identified by the Interdepartmental Committee for At-
mospheric Sciences (ICAS) in 1971.47 The National Science Founda-
tion, which originally planned the experiment, was recommended as
the lead agency for the project, and assistance was to be offered by the
Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Interior, and Trans-
portation and by the Atomic Energy Commission and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration.48
Although there was interagency cooperation in planning the experi-
ment and some support to the project during early years by some of
the aforementioned agencies, eventually, most of the other agencies
pulled out and NSF had to provide full support on its own. In a 1974
investigation of the Federal weather modification program, the Gen-
eral Accounting Office (GAO) concluded that "even though the ex-
42 Downie and Dirks, "National Science Foundation Weather Modification Program,"
1976. p. 557.
43 National Science Foundation. "Renort of the First National Symposium on Hail Sup-
pression." Dillon, Colo., Oct. 14-15, 1965, p. 1.
44 Ibid.
43 National Science Foundation. Hail Suppression Research Steering Committee, "Outline
of a Hail Suppression Test." March 1968, p. 1.
48 National Center for Atmospheric Research and Select Planning Group of the Northeast
Colorado Hail Experiment, "Flan for the Northeast Colorado Hail Experiment," Boulder,
Colo.. Mar. 17. 1969.
47 Federal Council for Science and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. "A National Program for Accelerating Progress in Weather Modification,"
ICAS rept. No. 15a, June 1971, p. 21. (The seven national projects are listed in this report,
p. 225. )
48 Ibid., pp. 35-37.
276
periment was well planned, requiring extensive interagency participa-
tion, * * * for the most part, agencies could not and did not meet all
their obligations." 49 The GAO study observed that, because of the
withdrawal of some of the intended support, "important segments of
research were lost for 1973" and that each operational season would
continue to have problems with commitments from participating
agencies.50 The other national projects recommended by the ICAS,
each with much less coordinated planning than XHRE or with no such
coordinated planning at all, failed to materialize as truly national
projects, although some were pursued as major single-agency projects.
NHRE was based on the original NECHE plan prepared for the
XSF by the Xational Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) , and
management for conduct of the experiment was assigned to NCAR
by NSF. The experiment was a cooperative effort between NCAR and
10 universities, funded by NSF, with additional support from the De-
partment of Commerce (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin-
istration), the Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Ad-
ministration), and the Department of Defense. Figure 9 is a map of
the northeastern corner of Colorado, showing the two areas between
Sterling, Colo., and Kimball, Nebr., which were target areas for the
NHRE. Field headquarters for the experiment were located near
Grover, Colo. Figure 10 is a more detailed NHRE map, showing the
special use airspace and the protected area as well as the mesonet and
rawinsonde site locations during the 1974 season.
6000
LARAMIE /
5000
KJ05 km GROVER
RADAR RANGE 1
CHEYENNE
wyqMing
f /
NEBRASKA
KIMBALL
'° SIDNEY
COLbRAD'O
/\! (
/\ > FT COLLINS [-
\ ' O " '
\ / I GREELEY
STERLING
^BOU
I
LOER^W V
FT MORGAN
DENVER
s
,-AKRON
50
I I I I
Figure 9. — Location map, showing the vicinity of northeastern Colorado where
the National Hail Research Experiment (NHRE) was conducted. NHRE field
headquarters were located near Grover, Colo. The two areas outlined between
Sterling and Kimball were the target areas for the seeding program in 1072
southern area) and in 1973 and 1974 (northern area). (From Wade, et al..
1977. )
49 Comptroller General of the United States. "Need for a National Weather Modification
Research Program," report to the Congress, U.S. General Accounting Office, B-133202,
Auk. 23. 1074. pp. 10-22.
60 Ibid., p. 20.
277
s
pecial Use Air
SPACE
rti
■ «lil»iiiimn ii
h
5
mov^.e n
0
5
\ SiDN£y\ r— i lODOEPOlE B
^ AREa
\^»r» ® E
-
1
E
s
» ,j
« V
C
'k •
t riiu !
H N-AE FOLD
I * -E.OOU.HTEAS
E -o
fi
d o«p*.'" *
Vt
|
J* °" ~
1 ^
!*STE«ii«io
1
<r /
J*
97* NATiCKlAL MAIL BESfABtl. EXPER.MEN'
LOCATIOh MAP
— fi
/
° h= T ,W. M.ES
s — * ,M » y ■ * r ...
Figure 10. — Detailed location map for the National Hail Research Experiment
(XHRE), showing the special use airspace and protected area, as well as the
mesonet and rawinsonde site locations during the 1974 summer season. (Cour-
tesy of the National Science Foundation.)
Following collaborative studies of northeast Colorado hailstorms
by NCAR, Colorado State University, and the U.S. Department of
Commerce during the period 1968-70, what was to become the National
Hail Research Experiment (XHRE) effectively began in the summer
season of 1970 with the following twofold plan :
1. To carry out research into those processes important to the under-
standing of hail production in severe thunderstorms, and
2. To perform a randomized test of a hail suppression technique
modelled in some important respects after the reportedly successful
operation in the Soviet Union.
The twofold objective of XHRE has remained throughout the proj-
ect : however, its statement has varied from year to year in response to
changes in emphasis both at XSF and at NCAR. In particular, after
transfer of the project to RAXX. an important emphasis was given
to social, economic, legal, and environmental studies in connection with
the potential impact of hail suppression.
A preliminary field program, for instrument testing and field experi-
ence, was undertaken during the summer of 1971 ; and during the
summers of 1972, 1973, and 1974 the major randomized hail sup-
pression test was conducted along with other basic research on hail
278
properties. Instead of continuing the randomized seeding experiment
for the planned 5 years, it was curtailed at the close of the 1974 season
because research evidence showed strongly that seeding as performed
was not likely to suppress hail in northeast Colorado and preliminary
analysis indicated that data from 2 more years was unlikely to demon-
strate a suppression effect.51 At a symposium on hail and hail suppres-
sion in the fall of 1975,52 most of the experts agreed that continuation
of the 1972-74 randomized seeding experiment was unwise for the
reasons given above.
A revised plan for NHRE followed this symposium, in which it
was stated that future research should be directed "* * * to combine
applied research, development of techniques, and redesign of a ran-
domized seeding experiment in a manner which will provide the great-
est chance of reaching a conclusive answer as to the feasibility of hail
suppression in a reasonable time." 53 The revised plan also committed
the NHRE staff to completion of a report on the 1972-74 randomized
seeding experiment. The five-volume report, the first volume of which
is a summary of the analysis and results, has recently been completed
and distributed.54
A short field season for NHRE was undertaken during 1975 to test
new instruments and a new data system aboard the South Dakota
School of Mines and Technology armored, penetrating T-28 aircraft.
Operated in coordination with the Grover S-band radar, the Grover
control center, and the aircraft tracking system, the test was successful
and valuable data were obtained. Field measurements were carried out
on a larger, more comprehensive scale during the summer of 1976 ; how-
ever, no seeding was done.55 Analyses of data from previous years con-
tinued in 1976 and 1977. Field research in 1976 and succeeding analyses
were intended to assist in an improved design for a randomized seeding
experiment.
Highlights of the results obtained by intensive analysis of the data
obtained from NHRE through the 1975 summer field season have been
summarized by Downie and Dirks as follows : 56
1. The original techniques employed in NHRE were based on con-
cepts developed in the Soviet Union, which hypothesized that rapid
hail growth took place in local regions of liquid water accumulation
zones. A variety of observations has led to the rejection of the Soviet
model of hail formulation for northeast Colorado storms.
2. Observations within the clouds and examination of thin sections
of hailstones indicate that the iee-cryst a 1 -riming (graupel) process is
dominant rather than the waterdrop-coalescence mode of precipitation
formation.
D1 Ibid., pp. 3-4.
G2 National Center for Atmospheric Research. "NHRE Symposium/Workshop on Hail and
Its Suppression," Estes Park, Colo., Sept. 21-28, 1975. National Hail Research Experiment
technical report NCAR/7100 75/2. Boulder, Colo., November 1975 130 pp.
53 National Hail Research Experiment Staff, revised plan for the National Hail Research
Experiment. National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colo., February 1976, p. 3.
"Crow. B. L., P. W. Summers A. B, Long, C. A. Knight, G. B. Foote, and J. E Dye. final
report — "National Hall Research Experiment : Randomized Seeding Experiment: 1972-74.
Vol. I. I<]xperimental Results and Overall Summary. " National Center for Atmospheric Re-
search. Boulder, Colo., December 1976. 260 pp. [Vols. II, III, IV, and V deal with precipita-
tion measurements, meteorological summary, radar summary, and hail declaration proce-
dures ;ind seeding operations, respectively.]
"University Corp. for Atmospheric Recearch. "Fiscal Year 1978 Work Plan for Analysis
of Data From the National Hail Research Experiment,** p. 3.
^Downie and Dirks, "National Science Foundation Weather Modification Program,"
1976, pp. 557-558.
279
3. Much effort was expended in the development of new instru-
mentation during the NHRE experiment to provide direct measure-
ments of the characteristics of hail-producing storms which were
necessary to validate the concepts of hail suppression.
4. Eesults from the randomized seeding experiment, which was car-
ried out during the period 1972-74, do not permit one to conclude that
seeding had any effect on hail or rainfall. However, the data are ex-
tremely valuable for determining the required density and extent of
surface instruments for a future seeding experiment, as well as esti-
mating the length of time a future experiment would have to be carried
out to detect a specified effect.
5. Studies of direct economic costs and benefits have provided esti-
mates of the breakeven point for operational cloud seeding and reiter-
ated the value of hail suppression if reductions in damage of at least 10
percent are attainable.
Referring to the randomized seeding experiment, conducted from
1072 through 1974, the following conclusion was made in the final
report : At the outset, the total mass of hail at the ground in the target
area was identified as the primary response variable for evaluating
seeding effects on hailfall. The major conclusion of the experiment is
that no statistically significant effect of seeding is detected. This result
is true for the hail mass and all other response variables considered,
regardless of the method of analyzing the data.57
In a recent paper by Knight, Foote, and Summers it was concluded
that "at the present state of knowledge of hail formation in storms, it
would appear to be premature to start another major statistical seeding
experiment. There is no new, very promising technique in the offing, as
the Soviet method appeared to be when NHRE started." 58 The authors
further state that scientific research necessary for a solid foundation
for new attempts to modify the precipitation from convective storms is
underway and provide the following summary of positive results from
N HRE :
The National Hail Research Experiment included a first attempt at mounting
a hail suppression test with a strict randomized design and evaluation based
upon physical measurement of hail rather than crop damage. The results have
l»een analyzed in detail, with extensive evaluation of data quality and of opera-
tional success, facets not generally treated in such detail in previous programs.
Tlie outcome was that the seeding may have had a variety of non-zero effects or
no effects at all. The one conclusive result was to rule out very large increases or
decreases of hail or rain by the seeding. The physical research portion of NHRE
led to advances in knowledge of hail and of storms, and contributed substantially
to the development of the research tools . . . needed to derive answers to the
oul standing, practical problems.50
Figure 11 shows the components of the Portable Automated Mesonet
(PAM) data network. There were 15 of the remote PAM stations in
the. XHRE observing network during the 1976 field season. Each
PAM station measures pressure, temperature, moisture, precipitation,
and wind direction and speed. Data are telemetered to a central collec-
tion point, in real time if needed, or they are stored at the PAM
station and collected at the central collection point daily.
fi' Crow, et al.. "Final Report — National Hail Research Experiment : Randomized Seeding
Experiment : 1972-74." vol. 1. 1976. p. iii.
Knight. Charles A.. G Brant Foote, and Peter W. Summers, "Physical Research and
General Conclusions from the National Hail Research Experiment." preprints from the
"Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification." Champaign-Urbana,
111.. Oct. 10-13, 1977. American Meteorological Society, Boston, Mass., p. 165.
59 Ibid.
280
PORTABLE AUTOMATED MESONET (PAM)
STATION
Figure 11. — Components of the Portable Automated Mesonet (PAM) data col-
lection system, used in the National Hail Research Experiment (NHRE). Each
PAM station measures pressure, temperature, moisture, and wind speed and
direction; data are then telemetered to a central collection point. (Courtesy
of the National Science Foundation.)
A typical remote field installation of the portable automated mesonet (PAM)
system. (Courtesy of the National Science Foundation.)
282
Weather modification technology development
Research sponsored by the NSF under this category is intended
to utilize predictive models, advanced measurement systems, and
statistical analyses to improve the experimental design and evaluation
of weather modification investigations. Part of the demand for some
of the long, costly weather modification experiments is due to the
large natural variability of atmospheric processes, which is a major
obstacle to successful field tests of weather modification technology.
It is expected that improvements achieved through the high priority
research incorporating the combined use of the three research tools
listed above will not only aid in the logistic design of experiments,
but will also reduce the predicted natural variability of weather
events, thus reducing the overall time required for conducting a de-
finitive experiment.60
The NSF-supported Climax experiments (conducted by Colorado
State University from 1960 to 1970) first demonstrated the efficacy
of wintertime orographic precipitation enhancement. Results of these
experiments have provided the basis for a number of subsequent dem-
onstration experiments.61 The following examples of weather modifi-
cation technology development projects have received NSF research
support in recent years : 62
1. Evaluation of the Florida area cumulus experiment (FACE),
where cloud motion has been found to be a significant covariate in the
data evaluation.
2. Development of new techniques for the evaluation of convective
precipitation in the metropolitan meteorological experiment (Metro-
mex).
3. Development and testing of statistical- physical methods for the
evaluation of operational cloud-seeding programs.
4. Research on various ice nucleants which might be used instead of
silver iodide and on development of delivery systems for organic
nucleants.
5. Assessment of Midwest cloud characteristics for weather modifi-
cation, by compiling and analyzing sample statistics of variables im-
portant in cloud development and precipitation processes as well as in
their modification as a function of mesoscale and macroscale atmos-
peric conditions.
6. Exploration of the feasibility of artificially generating cirrus
clouds as a weather modification tool and numerical modeling of ef-
fects of cirrus clouds on the troposphere and mesoscale weather.
7. Maintenance and operation of a testing and calibration facility for
seeding materials, cloud-seeding generators, and ice nucleus measur-
ing instrumentation, for use by research projects of Federal agencies
and by the commercial cloud-seeding industry (at Colorado State
University).
Other specific research projects designed to improve the technology
of weather modification are found in the list of recent RANN awards
for weather modification research in table 14. In the past, the NSF
program in weather modification has made significant contributions to
80 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences, ICAS 20-FY77, p. 96.
81 The Climax experiments are discussed under orographic precipitation enhancement tech-
nology, in ch. p. 77.
62 Downie and Dirks, "National Science Foundation Weather Modification Program," 1976.
p. 560 ; and Currie S. Downie, personal communication.
283
the initial phases of major weather modification projects of other Fed-
eral agencies, such as Project Stormfury (Department of Commerce)
and Project Skyfire (Department of Agriculture) .
Instrumented aircraft, operated by the Research Aviation Facility of the National
Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), whose primary mission in the 1976
summer field season of the National Hail Research Experiment (NHRE), was
to assess the feasibility of on-top cloud seeding. (Courtesy of the National
Science Foundation.)
Inadvertent weather modification
The objective of this portion of the NSF/RANN weather modifica-
tion research program is "to delineate the mechanisms whereby, and
the extent to which, an agricultural region modifies its own climate
and an urban area modifies its surrounding weather, precipitation, and
aerosol." 63 Most of the NSF research on inadvertent weather modifi-
cation is concentrated in the metropolitan meteorological experiment
(METROMEX) in the neighborhood of St. Louis. The research seeks
to provide better definition of the causes for anomalies in precipitation
and other atmospheric properties observed as a result of the urban in-
fluence. In addition to METROMEX other inadvertent weather modi-
fication research in which NSF has interest includes studies on the ef-
fees of energy development, expanded agricultural production, and
growing urban sprawl.64
One current NSF-sponsored project is being conducted by the Uni-
versity of Washington on inadvertent effects induced by coal-fired
electric powerplants. The objective of this research is to determine
63 National Science Foundation, "Summary of Awards : 1976," Division of Advanced En-
vironmental Research and Technology, Washington, D.C. (no publication date), NSF-RA-
760219, p. 97.
64 Federal Council on Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee on Atmos-
pheric Sciences, ICAS 20-FY77, pp. 96-97.
284
the effects on visibility, clouds, and precipitation of the effluents from
modern coal powerplants. Such effects may be considerable since the
plants emit much heat, moisture, particulates, and gaseous material
into the atmosphere. Results from the project are expected to aid in
evaluation of environmental effects of these generators and to assist in
the siting of new powerplants. Principal users of the results include
regional, State, and Federal agencies concerned with energy develop-
ment, research, ecology, and land development, as well as engineering
firms involved with air pollution impact studies and control systems.65
The subject of another inadvertent weather modification study is
the influence on the climates of the Great Plains by widespread irriga-
tion. The main objective of this research is to determine the effects on
precipitation; also of concern are influences on other meteorological
parameters. Results show the existence of rainfall anomalies over an
area comparable in size to the irrigated area, and the effects are most
detectable during wet summer months.66
METROMEX is a multi-institutional, multiyear research project
sponsored by the NSF and several other Government agencies, at-
tempting to discover causes for, and to assess consequences of, urban-
ind'uced eather effects at St. Louis and vicinity. Primary goals of
METROMEX are the systematic investigation of : 67
The effects of a large urban complex on the frequency, amount,
intensity, and duration of clouds, precipitation, and related severe
weather; and
The conditions whereby the urban complex modifies the precip-
itation process.
Application related goals of the experiment are investigation and
activities : 68
To study and develop techniques for translating the results of
the scientific goals to other urban areas so as to predict the urban-
related changes in other cities ;
To translate relevant results to a wide variety of users in the
scientific, government, and business communities ;
To provide the basis for studies of the potential changes in cli-
mate relating to megalopolis and to major land use changes.
A wide variety of potential users of the information from METRO-
MEX include urban and regional planners, meteorologists, hydrol-
ogists, airport planners and operators, and air quality scientists. The
study is relevant to impacts of increased use of coal, large concentra-
tions of electrical energy generators in power parks, and long range
consequences of air pollution on climate.69
METROMEX is the world's first major field program planned to
link urban land use with modification of the surrounding weather. The
selection of St. Louis as the site for the experiments was based on the
relatively simple topography of the city and its surroundings, the
existence of farmlands downwind to the east in the "shadow" of the
85 National Science Foundation. Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology, "Summary of Awards : 1976," p. 99.
w Downie and Dirks, "National Science Foundation Weather Modification Program," 1976.
p. 559 .
m "Principal Investigators of Project Metromex. Metromex Update." Bulletin of the
American Meteorological Society, vol. 57, No. 3, Mar. 1976, p. 304.
" Ibid.
» Downie and Dirks, "National Science Foundation Weather Modification Program," 1976.
p. 559.
285
city on which urban influences can be studied, the relatively unclut-
tered airspace above the city which permitted research flights and
atmospheric experiments, and the patterns of urbanization which are
typical of other areas in midlatitude North America.70
Most of the METROMEX field activities were conducted during the
summer months in a 2,000-square-mile area about 56 miles in diameter
which includes St. Louis and the Alton-Wood River industrialized area
to the northeast. A larger 3,800-square-mile area which includes St.
Louis and extends downward contained the world's largest rain-gage
network.71 These two areas are shown in figure 12.
O STANDARD WEATHER OBSERVATION SITE
Figure 12. — METROMEX field experiment area, centered in St. Louis, and ex-
tended "downwind" area containing network of rain gages and other instru-
mentation. (From Changnon ad Simonin. Studies of selected precipitation
cases from METROMEX. Illinois State Water Survey, Urbana, 1975.)
70 National Science Foundation, "Do Cities Change the Weather?" Mosaic, vol. 5, No. 3,
summer 1974, p. 30.
1 1bid.
34-857 O - 79 - 21
286
Within the research and data collection areas, measurements have
been made of the speeds and direction of winds at different heights and
locations, of temperatures, cloud dynamics, precipitation, the nature
and intensity of pollutants, number and sizes of storms, and the quality
and quantity of ground water under different weather conditions.72
Planning for METKOMEX was initiated in 1969-70 by scientists
from the Illinois State Water Survey, the University of Chicago, the
University of Wyoming, and Argonne National Laboratory. The ex-
perimental field program was launched in 1971, supported in part by
the Atomic Energy Commission, the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, and the State of Illinois, as well as the National Sci-
ence Foundation. Other research groups which later participated in the
project include Stanford Research Institute, Battelle Pacific North-
west Laboratories, the University of Missouri, Sierra Nevada Corp.,
and the University of California at San Diego.73 Field measurements
in METROMEX were essentially completed during 1976; although
the final METROMEX project report is expected to be published in
the near future, the analysis of the large amount of collected data
should continue for some years.
In a 1976 review of project accomplishments, the following findings
from METROMEX were summarized : 74
1. There is a summer precipitation anomaly at St. Louis, varying
between a 10 and 30 percent excess above background, the location
and intensity of which vary with the prevailing seasonal storm motions
and general character of summer weather.
2. Some individual rain intensity centers of showers or thunder-
storms that develop or pass over St. Louis and over the Alton-Wood
River industrial area appear to be enhanced significantly (94 and 73
percent, respectively) .
3. The major precipitation changes in and east of the urban indus-
trial area seem to occur during squall line or squall zone conditions
when nature is capable of producing moderate to heavy rains, result-
ing in a 60 percent or greater increase in heavy rain (greater than or
equal to 3 cm.) days, a 25 percent increase in thunderstorm activity,
and an 80 percent increase in hailstorms and hail intensities in and
just east of the city. Radar shows a region of maximum development
of large thunderstorms extending to 100 kilometers northeast from
the city.
4. Like most large cities, St. Louis has a marked heat island and an
identifiable minimum in specific humidity. These effects are most
marked at the surface, but often show height-averaged temperature
excesses of 1 degree K and moisture deficits of 1 gram of water vapor
per kilogram of air, relative to nearby rural areas, extending through
the mixing layer to cloud bases.
5. The low-level air flow under light wind conditions is markedly
perturbed by the city and often results in distinct convergence over
and just downwind of the city center.
6. The pattern of production of Aitken condensation nuclei (ACN)
and cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) has been developed for the
area. Elemental emission rates have been measured.
" Ibid.
73 Principal investigators of Project Metromex. Metromex update, 1976, p. 304.
71 Ibid., pp. 304-305.
287
7. Convective storms in the St. Louis area are significant mechanisms
for removal and deposition of urban pollutants.
Mechanisms which, in varying degrees, may be responsible for ob-
served downwind increases in summer precipitation, heavy rain occur-
rences, and hail activity include the large quantities of particulate
and gaseous matter injected by industries and motor vehicles into the
atmosphere, the heat added and heat island effects of the urban area,
the anomalous moisture patterns over the city, and the increased
turbulence and wind perturbation caused by the roughness of the
city's surface and the heat island.75 It has further been observed that
the 10 to 30 percent increase in summer rainfall over the 2,000-square-
mile area east of St. Louis produces a 15-percent average increase in
streamflow and increased infiltration of ground water.76
Societal utilization activities
The purposes of this portion of the NSF/RANN" program, con-
cerned with social, legal, environmental, and economic impacts of
weather modification, are "to evaluate societal reaction to weather
modification, to determine societal expectations, and to identify the
needs for the scientific base necessary to bring about successful appli-
cation of weather modification." This research "extends across the
disciplines of political, social, legal, economic, ecological, and physi-
cal sciences in an effort to investigate the impact of weather modifi-
cation technology on man." 77 A number of studies have been sup-
ported by the Foundation in this category, in which these aspects of
weather modification are examined.
A study group on the societal consequences of weather modification
was formed in 1973 at the request of the Interdepartmental Commit-
tee for Atmospheric Sciences (ICAS). This study, sponsored by the
NSF, was designed to examine needs of the Nation for a weather modi-
fication capability and to determine if the present Federal weather
modification program is directed toward meeting those needs. Results
of this investigation, now nearing completion, should be useful in
identifying the alterations or redirections of the Federal program
required to meet societal goals.78
Studies in social, legal, economic, and ecological aspects of weather
modification that are currently underway or have recently been com-
pleted include the following :
1. Preparation of a compendium on economic impacts of weather
variability, by the University of Missouri. This report was designed
to present quantified relations between weather and certain basic
human activities, such as agriculture and energy use.79
2. A comparative analysis of public response to weather modifica-
tion, by Human Ecology Research Services, Inc. Building on results
of 6 years of sociological study of public response to weather modifi-
cation, this research will examine social response to weather modifica-
tion in South Dakota and test preliminary hypotheses on acceptance
and rejection processes. Validation of the preliminary hypotheses and
75Downie and Dirks, "National Science Foundation Weather Modification Program,"
1976. p 559.
7« Ibid.
77 National Science Foundation. Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology, "Summary of Awards : 1976," p. 101.
78 Downie and Dirks, "National Science Foundation Weather Modification Program," 1976,
p. 560.
79 Ibid.
288
response, patterns will provide the framework for development of a
causal model of the acceptance/rejection process.80
3. Field experiment to test a hypothesis of the reality, characteris-
tic, and magnitude of extended area effects from weather modification,
by Colorado State University. With increasing evidence that planned
weather modification projects may have effects that extend over broad
geographic areas, this research is an investigation of "downwind''
effects of past experiments in the Rocky Mountains and the Great
Plains of the United States and in Israel, extending an earlier 3-year
study of such effects. Physical and statistical analyses are combined
to determine such extended area effects and to develop hypotheses de-
scribing processes which produce the effects. The project also includes
design of a field experiment based on results of these post hoc analyses
and on current results from modeling studies and physical experi-
ments. This research is intended to provide a basis for evaluating
extended-area effects on societal activities and should be valuable in
formulation of policies on public issues in weather modification.81
4. Management of nucleating agents used in weather modification
and development of microbial threshold toxicity criteria, by Colorado
State University. The purpose of this research is to provide informa-
tion on possible long-term effects of weather modification nucleating
agents on microbial ecosystems, concentrating on soil and aquatic eco-
systems, which are the most critical areas for accumulation of the
agents. Results of this study will be used to prepare environmental
impact statements for silver iodide seeding in various experimental
and operational cloud seeding programs.82 In the final phase of this
study, a workshop on the environmental impacts of cloud seeding
materials was conducted in Vail, Colo., in November 1976. The pro-
ceedings of the workshop are expected to be published during 1978.
5. Utilization of weather modification technology : A State govern-
ment decisionmaking study, by Syracuse University. State govern-
ments have taken the lead in developing regulatory policies affecting
the present use of weather modification technology: however, such
policies cover a wide spectrum, some being highly restrictive while
others are more permissive. This study, focusing on decisionmaking
processes in five States — South Dakota. Colorado, Illinois, Pennsyl-
vania, and California — will develop case histories and analyses of
policymaking, the availability of which should help Federal and State
officials in making decisions on emerging weather modification
technology.83
Agricultural iceather modification
This relatively new portion of the NSF/RANN weather modifica-
tion program is* evolving in response to a need "to develop a better
understanding of weather variability and its significance to food pro-
duction and to develop specific applications of weather modification
technology as it relates to agricultural needs.84 For such applications,
weather modification is considered in a broad context, including all
identifiable modifications of the atmospheric environment.
» National Science Foundation. Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nologv, "Summary of Awards : 1976," p. 101.
81 Ibid., p. 102.
w National Science Foundation. Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology. "Summary of Awards: Transition Quarter 1976." NSF 77-8. Washington, D.C.
(no publication date) , j). 48. _ . , _ . . ,-__«,
«• National Science Foundation. Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology, "Summary of Awards : 1976," p. 105.
289
A major study, which included an assessment of the potential of
weather modification in support of agriculture, was recently com-
pleted by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) /National Re-
search Council. The investigation dealt with changing weather and
climate patterns and their effects on agricultural and renewable re-
sources productivity.85 These implications were examined by the com-
mittee in climate and weather fluctuations and agricultural produc-
tion, which was established by the NAS in June of 1975 at the request
and with the support of the National Science Foundation. Among
other considerations, a chapter of the committee's report was devoted
to weather modification, covering such topics as the feasibility of
weather modification, crop-weather relationship and weather modifi-
cation, impact variability, and societal and environmental issues. The
committee made the following recommendations : 86
Intensive efforts should be made to apply existing basic knowl-
edge of atmospheric and cloud processes in specific applied re-
search programs to benefit agriculture. Methods of applying the
benefits of demonstrated or nearly demonstrated weather modi-
fication techniques to specific crop needs, incorporating water
storage, and other water management procedures, should be devel-
oped. Proper recognition of societal concerns must be included.
Gaps in basic knowledge of agriculturally oriented weather
modification should be identified, and research initiated to fill
them. Results of this research should be applied on an interactive
basis with ongoing research and application projects. Important
segments of the basic research should address the exploration of
new ideas and approaches.
Government organizational structures and policies should in-
sure an integrated approach to weather modification research so
that related problems such as rain and hail from convective sys-
tems can be treated in the same experimental framework. Research
programs should be interdisciplinary, should draw on the expertise
available from Government agencies and from the academic and
private sectors, and should incorporate a productive mix of big
science — permitting large, pooled facilities — and small science —
encouraging small group initiatives. The growing collaboration
between scientifically and operationally oriented weather modi-
fication experts should be focused on key crops and agricultural
regions.
Two other recent NSF-sponsored research projects on weather modi-
fication in support of agriculture are:
1. An assessment of the present and potential role of weather modi-
fication in agricultural production, conducted by Colorado State Uni-
versity. This research was intended to identify potential capabilities of
weather modification in terms of agricultural productivity and to
focus priorites for weather modification research in terms of maximum
benefits to agriculture. The research plan included a workshop of ex-
perts in agriculture and weather modification in order to develop an
authoritative document on the role of weather modification in increas-
ing world agricultural production.87
83 National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, "Climate and Food ; Climate
Fluctuation and U.S. Agricultural Production." a report of the Committee on Climate and
Weather Fluctuations and Agricultural Production, ISBN 0-309-02522-2, Washington,
D.C., 1976. 212 pp.
86 Ibid., p. 131.
87 National Science Foundation. Division of Advanced Environmental Research and Tech-
nology, "Summary of Awards : 1976," p. 105.
290
2. Assessment of weather modification in alleviating agricultural
water shortages during drought, conducted by the Illinois State water
survey. The purpose of this study was to provide information needed
in decisionmaking processes regarding use of weather modification for
mitigation of agricultural droughts in the Midwest and other similar
areas. This research was intended to contribute to man's knowledge of
the limitaitons of weather modification to planned precipitation aug-
mentation for agricultural applications and to assist in determining the
scope and duration of future weather modification research in similar
climatic regions of the world.88
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Introduction and general discussion
Within the Department of Commerce the research program in
weather modification is conducted by the Environmental Research
Laboratories of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA). Through NOAA's predecessor organizations, the U.S.
Weather Bureau and the Environmental Science Services Administra-
tion (ESSA), the Commerce Department has been active in weather
modification since 1946, with research programs directed at modifying
severe storms such as hurricanes, increasing rainfall from tropical
cloud systems, and suppressing lightning in thunderstorms. The two
major ongoing research projects are the Florida Area Cumulus Ex-
periment (FACE) , a project to demonstrate the possibility of increas-
ing precipitation from convective cloud systems through dynamic seed-
ing, and Project Stormfury, intended to mitigate the severe impacts of
hurricanes.
The NOAA Research Facilities Center (RFC) , is an operational and
technical organization, with the mission of providing instrumented air-
craft for research programs of NOAA and other Government agencies,
including weather modification projects. Part of NOAA's overall
weather modification effort is its program of Global Monitoring for
Climatic Change (GMCC), under which measurements are made of
natural and manmade atmospheric trace constituents in order to deter-
mine their increases or decreases and possible influences on climatic
change. Other research in recent years has been concerned with modi-
fication of extratropical severe storms and in suppression of lightning,
the latter in cooperation with the National Aeronautics and Space Ad-
ministration (NASA) in connection with protection of launch vehicles.
In addition to these activities intended to explore weather modifica-
tion and develop techniques for controlling the weather, NOAA also
conducts background research in a variety of areas of atmospheric sci-
ence that is essential to the future of weather modification development.
Included are modeling and theoretical work on the structure, dynamics,
and energy processes of severe storms such as hurricanes, tornadoes,
and thunderstorms. Also pertinent is the development of instrumenta-
tion for direct measurement of atmospheric properties and for remote
probing of the atmosphere.89
A summary of the funding for the NOAA weather modification
program for fiscal year 1976 through fiscal year 1978 (estimated) is
contained in table 15.
88 Ibid., pp. 105-106.
wTownsend, John W., testimony In : U.S. Congress. House of Representatives, Committee
on Science and Technology. Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere, "Weath-
er Modification," hearings. 94th Congress, 2d session, June 15-18, 1977, Washington, D.C,
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976, p. 171.
291
TABLE 15. — WEATHER MODIFICATION FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 1976 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 1978 FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION*
[In thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year—
1976
1977
1977
1978
870
180
735
810
Modification of convective clouds
Research facilities center (prorated)
755
1,589
171
281
0
757
1, 176
0
893
1, 000
0
Subtotal
4,304
632
2, 668
2,703
Global monitoring for climatic change:
Air quality analysis
1,717
313
438
76
1, 563
346
2, 138
160
Subtotal
2,030
514
1,909
2, 298
6, 334
1, 146
4, 577
5,001
> From Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. National Atmospheric Sciences Program: Fiscal Year 1978. ICAS 21-FY 78. August 1977, p. 89.
NOAA 1 X-band Doppler radar operated by the Wave Propagation Laboratory
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (Courtesy of the
U.S. Department of Commerce.)
The Florida Area Cumulus Experiment {FACE)
The FACE program is conducted by the cumulus group of NO AA's
National Hurricane and Experimental Meteorology Laboratory
292
(NHEML) and is an outgrowth of a series of experiments in which
individual clouds were seeded in Florida. These experiments demon-
strated that dynamic seeding 90 is effective in increasing the sizes and
lifetimes of individual cumulus clouds and the rainfall resulting from
them. FACE is designed to determine whether dynamic seeding can
be used to augment convective precipitation over a large area in south
Florida by promoting the development of larger, better organized
convective systems. Cloud merger, the joining of two formerly inde-
pendent cloud entities, appears to be the important natural process
leading to heavy and extensive rainfall in Florida.91
The design of FACE was intended to investigate two sequential
questions. The first question was whether dynamic seeding can be used
systematically to induce cloud merger and increase rainfall from the
groups of subject clouds, and the second was to determine whether
dynamic seeding can be used to produce a net increase in rainfall
over a fixed target area. An affirmative answer to the first question,
while necessary, may not be a sufficient condition to verify the second.92
FACE has been an exploratory experiment intended to answer these
questions; hence, its design has been evolutionary. It cannot, there-
fore, be regarded as a conclusive experiment, in spite of strong indica-
tions of a positive seeding effect, it must be replicated with
a predetermined design to confirm results achieved to date. It is
planned that such a confirmatory FACE effort will begin in Florida
during the summer of 1978.93
The experimental design for FACE is a random design, where the
days over a single target are randomized into seeded and nonseeded
days, with nonseeded days as the control. Experiments began on a
limited basis in 1970 and were continued in 1971, 1973, 1975, and 1976.
Design features included : 94
1. A fixed target area with the experiments randomized by day.
2. Surveillance of the clouds in the target by 10-centimeter radars,
with radar estimation of the rainfall (rain estimates were adjusted
using rain gages) .
3. Determination of suitable experimentation days on the basis of
a daily suitability criterion, based on predicted cloud heights for
seeded and nonseeded conditions, using a one-dimensional cloud model.
A factor was also introduced to bias the decision for suitability against
natural rainy days.
4. Flights by seeder aircraft on days that satisfy the suitability
criterion. The decision to seed was randomly determined in the air,
with only the randomizer knowing the decision. Suitable convective
clouds were seeded near their tops.
5. Final acceptance of a day for inclusion in the analysis only if 60
flares were ejected or six clouds were seeded, or both.
90 For a discussion of dynamic seeding of cumulus clouds see ch. 3, p. 68.
91 Woodley, William L., Joanne Simpson, Ronald Biondini, and Joyce Berkeley, "Rainfall
Results, 1970-75 : Florida Area Cumulus Experiment," Science, vol. 195, No. 4280, Feb. 25,
1977. p. 735.
92 Ibid.
93 Woodlev, William L., J. A. Jordan, Joanne Simpson, Ronald Biondini, and Jobn A.
Flueck. "XOAA's Florida Area Cumulus Experiment. Rainfall Results; 1970-76" (Sub-
mitted for publication to the Journal of Applied Meteorology.) 1978.
9* Woodlev. Simpson. Biondini, and Berkeley, "Rainfall Results, 1970-75 : Florida Area
Cumulus Experiment," 1977, pp. 735-736.
293
In the analysis of the FACE experimental days, floating target
and total target calculations were made for the 6 hours following
the initial seeding. The floating target is composed of the radar echoes
of all experimental clouds and those with which they merge. The
total target is made up of the floating target echoes plus the echoes of
nonexperimental clouds.95
Figure 13 is a map of the field design for FACE, showing the
Figure 13.— Field design for the Florida Area Cumulus Experiment (FACE).
The largest quadrilateral is total target area, within which are areas covered
by the dual Doppler radars, the mesonet intensive network and the clusters of
rainguages. (From Woodley and Sax, NOAA Technical Report ERL 354-WMPO
6, January 1976.)
85 Woodley, William L. and Robert I. Sax, "The Florida Area Cumulus Experiment : Ra-
Pe?Jg«?' Procedures, Results, and Future Course," NOAA technical report ERL 354-
WMPO 6. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-
tion, Environmental Research Laboratories, Boulder, Colo., January 1976 p xiv
294
13,000 km2 target area and several smaller areas of radar and
rain gage coverage, as configured in the period 1972-73. Although
the basic target area remained the same, the networks of intensive
coverage by radar and rain gages were modified somewhat in later
years.
Data from 75 experimental days have been accrued in FACE since
1970 ; these have represented 39 seed days and 36 control days. Analyses
have shown that dynamic seeding under appropriate atmospheric con-
ditions is effective in increasing the growth and rain production of in-
dividual cumulus clouds, in inducing cloud merger, and in producing
increases in rainfall from groups of convective clouds as they pass
through the target area. When rainfall over the total target area (i.e.,
that from the floating target plus that from nonexperimental clouds
within the target area) is averaged, a net increase also seems to result
from seeding.96
The following specific results of the experiment from analyses to
dato have been summarized by Woodley, et al. : 97
The many overall and specialized analyses presented in this paper lead to the
strong indication that dynamic seeding increased areal rainfall in FACE, by
altering convective processes on the mesoscale and promoting cloud merger.
Rainfall in the floating and total targets was greater in the mean (about 50 per-
cent in the floating target and 25 percent in the total target), and the standard
deviation (50 percent in the floating target and 40 percent in the total target) on
seed days than on control days.
The authors continue, discussing the physical basis for confidence : 98
Although FACE has been an exploratory effort with an evolving design, one
can have considerable confidence in the interpretation of the outcome. Increases
of seeding effect based on rain gage measurements agree with those based on
gage-adjusted radar. The microphysical measurements within seeded clouds
provide clear evidence for anomalous glaciation relative to their unseeded counter-
parts. * * * The time-dependence of the seeding effect and its dependence upon the
number of flares expended are consistent with an effect of seeding.
In fiscal year 1977, FACE activities have included a thorough anal-
ysis of available experimental data and additional research in order to
establish the physical basis for FACE rainfall results. During fiscal
year 1978 there will be further analysis of data and results obtained
from field programs in order to solidify, both physically and statisti-
cally, the encouraging preliminary results, showing a rainfall increase
over the entire 13,000 km2 experimental area on seed days versus non-
seed days.99
The implications of this work to the needs of hydrology and agricul-
ture demand that it be continued and expanded. A confirmatory dy-
namic seeding effort will be conducted in an area where there is both
need and a favorable meteorological and societal climate for such a
program.1 Preliminary studies are underway to identify possible addi-
86 Woodlev, William L., Joanne Simpson, Ronald Biondini. and Jill Jordan. "NOAA's
Florida Area Cumulus Experiment ; Rainfall Results. 1970-76." in preprints from Sixth
Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification. Champaign-Urbana, 111.,
Oct. 10-13. 1977. American Meteorological Society. Boston. 1977, p. 209.
87 Woodlev. Jordan. Simpson. Biondini. and Flueck, "NOAA's Florida Area Cumulus Ex-
periment ; Rainfall Results : 1970-1976." 1978.
M Ibid., p. 58.
98 Federal Coordinating Council for Science. Engineering, and Technology. Interdepart-
mental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences. "National Atmospheric Sciences Frogram :
Fiscal Year 1978," ICAS 21-FY 78, September 1977, p. 88.
1 Woodlev. Simpson, Biondini. and Jordan, "NOAA's Florida Area Cumulus Experiment;
Rainfall Results, 1970-76," 1977, p. 209.
295
tional sites for field experiments during fiscal year 1979. The long-
range objective of the program is to make the technology developed in
Florida available to otlier areas in the United States which are charac-
terized by periods when most of the rainfall is provided by convective
showers.
Preliminary plans have been developed to conduct a summer cumu-
lus experiment, along the lines of FACE, in the cornbelt of the Mid-
west, in an attempt to determine the transferability of the FACE
results. A very suitable region for such a field experiment appears to
be in central Illinois, and plans for the proposed Precipitation Aug-
mentation for Crops Experiment (PACE) have been concentrated on
this area, whose location is shown in figure 14. 2 Initial plans for the
Figure 14. — Map showing the location of the target area for the proposed precipi-
tation Augmentation for Crops Experiment (PACE) (from Ackerman and Sax,
1977).
Note. — Shown for each State is its 1975 value of farm products in billions of dollars, and
its resulting national rank.
2 Ackerman, Bernice. and Robert I. Sax. precipitation augmentation for crops experi-
ment (PACE), presentation to the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification
Advisory Board, Champaign, 111.. Oct. 13, 1977.
296
meteorological program are being developed by the Illinois State
Water Survey and NOAA's NHEML, and interest in the program has
been indicated by scientists from four midwestern universities, the
University of Virginia, and the NHEML. A four-stage experiment is
now contemplated, which could extend over a 9- to 13-year span, with
costs ranging from $8.5 to $10.5 million.3
Project Stormfury
NOAA's largest effort in weather modification has been Project
Stormfury, conducted by the National Hurricane and Experimental
Meteorology Laboratory (NHEML) and aimed at developing methods
for moderating the most destructive peak winds in hurricanes. The
project is designed to investigate the structure and dynamics of tropi-
cal cyclones and their potential for modification. The range of activi-
ties under Stormfury includes development of mathematical models ;
theoretical and diagnostic investigations and calculations; field re-
search on hurricane structure, variability, and dynamics ; and actual
hurricane modification experiments.4
The earliest known hurricane modification attempt occurred Octo-
ber 13, 1947, when General Electric Co. scientists and technicians,
under Government contract, dropped dry ice into the thin, stratified
clouds outside the walls of a hurricane east of Jacksonville, Fla.
Equipment suitable for monitoring the structure, intensity, and move-
ment of the storm during this operation was not available ; however,
some localized changes in the thin-layered cloud were noted by visual
observation. Subsequent studies indicate that this operation could have
had little effect on the storm. The experiments from which the present
project evolved began in 1961, though Project Stormfury was formally
established in 1962 as a combined program of the Department of Com-
merce (Weather Bureau) and the Department of Defense (Navy).
Over the years the National Science Foundation has provided support
to various parts of the program, and the U.S. Air Force became an
active participant in the late 1960,s. Since the Defense Department's
decision to discontinue joint sponsorship in 1973, the program has been
conducted primarily by the Commerce Department.5 Aircraft from the
Air Force and from the National Aeronautics and Space Administra-
tion (NASA) are available for future experiments and storm moni-
toring.
The concept behind Stormfury seeding is that dynamic seeding of
cumulus cloud towers just outside of the eyewall of the hurricane
causes these clouds to develop vertically until they replace the original
eyewall. The effect is to increase the diameter of the eye, reducing the
maximum winds in the new eyewall.
Under this program, four storms have actually been seeded between
1961 and 1971; the tracks of these storms are shown in figure 15. In
the first storm, Hurricane Esther, clouds near the eyewall were seeded
with relatively small amounts of silver iodide on September 16 and
17, 1961. After the experiment of September 16 there was an apparent
10-percent recorded reduction in maximum wind speed, but little
change was observed on Septemlxu- 17, owing perhaps to seeding in a
3 Ibid.
4 Sheets, Robert C, "Project Stormfury : Questions and Answers." U.S. Department of
Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Research
Laboratories, National Hurricane and Experimental Meteorology Laboratory, Coral Gables,
Fla.. 1077, p. 1.
° Ibid.
297
cloud-free zone. Similar single-seeding experiments were conducted
on August 23 and 24, 1963, in Hurricane Beulah, with similar results;
that is, an apparent 10- to 14-percent reduction in wind speed on
AujTust 24, but little change on August 23. Errors in delivery of the
seeding agent were subsequently attributed to the poor radar systems
used at the time.6
Figure 15. — Tracks of all hurricanes which have been seeded from 1961 to 1971.
Times and locations of seedings are indicated. (From Sheets, 1977.)
The greatest apparent success was achieved in experiments on Hur-
ricane Debbie on August 18 and 20, 1969, when maximum wind speed
reductions of 30 and 15 percent, respectively, were observed. The reduc-
tion on August 18 followed five seeding events at 2-hour intervals
over an 8-hour period. Debbie was not seeded on August 19 and
regained strength ; and the observed reduction on August 20 followed
the same seeding procedure used on August 18. Although the results
were exciting, an evaluation problem is that the observed changes fol-
lowing seeding are within the natural hurricane variability. Such
-ccurrences are statistically unlikely, however, since a 15-percent reduc-
;ion would occur less than 10 percent of the time naturally, and a
30-percent reduction is less than 5 percent likely to occur.7
The last storm to have been seeded under Stormfury was in 1971 on
Hurricane Ginger, a storm which did not have suitable structure for
eye modification experiments. Clouds were seeded well away from the
storm center, and only local effects were detected. Consequently, the
experiment on Ginger ought not to be included with the Esther, Beu-
6 Ibid., pp. 1-2.
7 Ibid., p. 2.
298
lah, and Debbie cases.8 Results of all known hurricane seeding experi-
ments are summarized in table 16. The 1947 storm and Hurricane
Ginger in 1971, results from which are much less definitive than those
of the other cases, are discussed in footnotes to the table.
To minimize the possibility that a populated region might experi-
ence adverse effects from a hurricane seeding experiment, many safe-
guards have been built into Stormfury. Although all results to date
have been either positive or neutral, strict guidelines are maintained
in selection of storms to be seeded.9 To be eligible for seeding, a hurri-
cane must be predicted to be within 700 nautical miles (1,100 kilome-
ters) of the operating base — Miami or San Juan — for at least 12 hours
and have maximum winds of at least 65 knots. There will be no seed-
ing if the predicted track of the hurricane has more than a 10-percent
chance of approaching within 50 miles of a populated land area with-
in 24 hours after the seeding.10 Consequently, few opportunities have
TABLE 16.— RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTS IN SEEDING HURRICANE CLOUDS NEAR THE EYEWALL*2
Approximate
Silver iodide maximum
Number of used3 wind speed
Nane and date seedings (number, kilogram) change (percent)
Huiricane Esther:
Sept. 16, 1961 1 8/35.13 -10
Sept. 17, 1961 1 8/35.13 <0
Hurricane Beulah:
Aug. 23, 1963 1 55/219.96 <0
Aug. 24, 1963 1 67/235.03 -14
Hurricane Debbie:
Aug. 18, 1969 5 976/185.44 -30
Aug. 20, 1969 5 978/185.82 -15
1 In addition, a hurricane was seeded Oct. 13, 1947, and Hurricane Ginger was seeded Sept. 26 and 28, 1971. The clouds
seeded in these storms were far different and the seedings were done in a different fashion than for the storms listed above.
- From sheets. Project Stormfury : (Questions and Answers. 1977.)
3 Values in column are for totil number of units and total kilograms of silver iodide used each day (based on records
kept by Sheldon D. Elliot, Ji.). Test results indicate the smaller seeding pyrotechnic units make more efficient use of the
silver iodide.
4 Pyrotechnics dropped outside seedable clouds.
been afforded by nature for these experiments. Furthermore, analyses
of past cases, particularly the Debbie experiments, have shown the
need for more sophisticated aircraft and instrumentation, so that-
actual field experiments were discontinued in 1972, while state-of-the-
art aircraft and instrumentation were procured.
Several alternatives have been considered for increasing the number
of suitable experimental situations over a given time period. One ap-
proach would be to move the project to an area where nature provides
more opportunities statistically, such as the western Pacific Ocean. Or,
operations could be combined for a number of areas, such as the North
Atlantic and the eastern North Pacific or the North Atlantic and Aus-
tralian storm areas. Another possibility is to relax selection criteria,
but this does not seem to be a desirable choice for the near future.11
« Ibid., p. 3.
8 Ibid., p. 4.
10 U S Department of Commerce News. "Stormfury — 1977 to Seed One Atlantic Hurri-
cane." news release, NOAA 77-248. Kockville, Md., Sept. 20, 1977, p. 1.
11 Sheets, "Project Stormfury : Questions and Answers," 1977, p. 5.
299
Tentative plans were formulated to conduct seeding experiments on
typhoons of the western Pacific in view of the greater frequency of
suitable storms in that region. These plans were canceled, however,
when protests were received from the Governments of Japan and main-
land China, although the Philippines had been favorable to such ex-
periments. Meteorological satellite observations have shown that hur-
ricanes and tropical storms in the eastern North Pacific (to the west of
Central America) occur more frequently than thought previously, the
number in that region exceeding those in the western North Atlantic in
recent years. Hence, a significant increase in opportunities for hur-
ricane research can be achieved by including eastern Pacific storms.12
This would require a formal agreement with Mexico, with whose of-
ficials bilateral consultations have begun, and with other countries that
may be directly affected by the hurricanes which are eligible for seed-
ing.13
In the interim since 1972, new instrumentation has been developed,
especially in the field of cloud physics, and NOAA's instrumented air-
craft has been updated and augmented in preparation for research ex-
periments in 1977 if suitable storms become available. During the 1976
hurricane season, XHEML personnel utilized two new aircraft for the
first time in research hurricane reconnaissance. The complement of five
aircraft now available for Stormfury include three from the NOAA
Research Facilities Center and one each from the Air Force and
NASA.
Since 1972 Stormfury research has concentrated on special observa-
tional programs to provide data on hurricane structure and microphys-
ical processes and on analytical and theoretical studies to improve
their description and understanding. There has been a major emphasis
on development of mathematical models to simulate the development,
structure, and behavior of hurricanes in the natural state and when
seeded. A more explicit seeding hypothesis has been denned from the
results of this research, which will also benefit evaluation of future
seeding experiments.14
Plans were formulated for one hurricane seeding experiment in the
Atlantic in 1977, if conditions were suitable, as a rehearsal for full-
scale resumption of multiple experiments during 1978, using the five
newly instrumented aircraft. For hurricanes not suitable or eligible for
such experiments, emphasis will be on acquisition of further informa-
tion on the structure and natural variability of hurricanes on the 24-
to 36-hour timescale characteristic of the seeding experiments.15
The purpose of Stormfury is the establishment of a modification
hypothesis at a confidence level high enough that the techniques can
be taken from the experimental stage and used operationally.16 It is
12 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric S-ienre*. •'National Atmospheric Sciences Program : Fiscal Year 1977." ICAS 20-
FY77, May 1976, p. 89.
13 Epstein. Edward S.. in testimony before the Subcommittee on the Environment and the
Atmosphere, House Committee on Science and Technology. U.S. House of Representatives,
on NOAA's atmospheric and oceanic environmental research and development, Mav 18. 1977.
" Ibid.
13 Federal Coordinating Council for Science. Engineering, and Technology, Interdepart-
mental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences. ICAS 21-FY78. 1977, p. 88.
16 Sheets, "Project Stormfury : Questions and Answers." 1977. p. 10.
300
felt that 10 to 12 seeding experiments are required to verify the
Stormfury hypothesis, taking at least two or three full hurricane sea-
sons to realize sufficient seeding opportunities.17
Research Facilities Center {RFC)
The NOAA Research Facilities Center, formerly the Research
Flight Facility, is an operational and technical support organization
whose mission is to provide instrumented aircraft to meet the cloud-
seeding and airborne measurements needs of NOAA and other gov-
ernmentally sponsored research programs.18
A program of modernization for this facility was begun in fiscal
year 1973 and completed in fiscal year 1977. In fiscal year 1973 three of
the then existing NOAA aircraft (an RB-57 and two DC-6's) were
deactivated, but the C-130 was retained. Two new P-3 aircraft were
acquired in the following years and, with the C-130, were instru-
mented with the most modern and sophisticated meteorological and
oceanographic research measurement systems available.19 Instrumen-
tation includes inertial/omega/doppler navigation systems, data re-
cording/processing/display systems, dropwindsonde systems, cloud
physics measurement devices, radar systems, cloud-seeding equipment,
gust probes, and photographic systems.20
Global Monitoring for Climatic Change (GMCC)
This program, considered as part of NOAA's total weather modifi-
cation research effort, is designed to provide quantitative data needed
to understand and predict climatic changes. Data are derived from
measurements of existing amounts of natural and manmade trace con-
stituents in the atmosphere, from which are determined the rates of
increase or decrease in these trace amounts and their possible effects
on climate change.21
Measurements are made at a network of baseline observations at
four stations — Point Barrow, Alaska ; Mauna Loa, Hawaii ; American
Samoa; and South Pole, Antarctica. Measurements at these baseline
observatories include determination of concentrations of carbon diox-
ide, carbon monoxide, and surface and total ozone; of solar-terrestrial
radiation ; of atmospheric aerosols ; of precipitation chemistry ; and of
standard meteorological variables — wind, temperature, humidity, pre-
cipitation, and pressure. The program also includes the development
of new and improved measurement systems for atmospheric trace con-
stituents for observatory use, data reduction and quality control of
observations, and analysis of the data in terms of climatic variations.22
17 Epstein, testimony before the Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere,
House Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, May 18.
1977.
18 Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology, Interdepart-
mental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences, ICAS 21-FY78, 1977, p. 8S.
19 Ibid.
20 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
phere Sciences, ICAS 20-FY77. 1976. pn. 89-90.
21 Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology, Interdepart-
mental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences, ICAS 21-FY78, 1977, pp. 88-89.
12 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. "National Atmospheric Sciences Program : Fiscal Year 197o," ICAS 18-
FY75, May 1974, p. 79.
301
In the past there have been cooperative projects with the University of
Rhode Island and for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and
the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration.
The program also includes a seven station network in the continuous
United States for measuring total atmospheric ozone. An eighth sta-
tion is planned for installation in California during fiscal year 1978.
The world standard ozone spectrophotometer is maintained by the
GMCC program, and during fiscal year 1977 an intercomparison of
seven secondary standards of various countries with the NOAA stand-
ard was conducted at Boulder, Colo.23
During fiscal year 1978 the GMCC program plans are as follows : 24
A careful analysis of a number of atmospheric parameters important in
climatic assessment will be continued and expanded. Global surface and tropo-
spheric temperature records will be updated and interpreted in terms of possi-
ble causes for the observed variability. Total ozone, and the vertical distribution
of ozone, and stratospheric water vapor measurements will be analyzed to detect
trends and further understand the causes for their fluctuations. The dura-
tion of sunshine, probably reflecting cloudiness over the United States will be
studied with updated information. The size of the 300-millibar (ten-kilometer
altitude) circumpolar vortex will be followed ; this quantity shows some promise
of being a monthly or seasonal climatic predictive tool. Fluorocarbon-11 and
-12 measurements at Adrigole, Ireland, will be analyzed in the light of the source
of the air mass reaching that location. Finally, work will continue on the use
of tetroons to delineate boundary layer air trajectories in urban areas and else-
where. This research is of use in certain air pollution problems.
L ig lit hi g suppression
In recent years NOAA has conducted a small experimental effort
in lightning suppression, using fine metalized nylon fibers — or chaff —
as a seeding agent. Based on a theoretical model, a field program was
initiated in 1972 to test the chaff seeding concept and to determine the
effect of such seeding on the electric fields of thunderstorms. Storms
are seeded from below, and, based on data from 10 seeded storms and
18 unseeded control storms, the number of lightning occurrences was
about 25 percent of those observed in the control storms. The experi-
ments were not strictly randomized; however, the observed differ-
ences between seeded and control storms was statistically significant.25
' During the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz launch, aircraft were on standby
for possible lightning-suppression flights at Cape Canaveral. Re-
search on thunderstorm electrofication at the Kennedy Space Center is
a cooperative program with NOAA, NASA, the Department of De-
fense, and several universities.26
M odification of extratropical severe storms
Research has been conducted by NOAA on the possibilities of mod-
erating and modifying mesoscale cloud systems associated with severe
storms, including thunderstorms, tornadoes, and cyclonic storm sys-
23 Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology, Interdepart-
mental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences, ICAS 21-FY78, 1977, p. 89.
2* Ibid.
25 Townsend, John W., Jr., in U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Sci-
ence and Technology, Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere, "Weather
Modification." hearings, 94th Cong., 2d sess., June 15-18, 1976. Washington, D.C., U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1976, p. 171.
16 Ibid., p. 172.
34-857 O - 79 - 22
302
terns. Critical to this research are studies in atmospheric physics and
atmospheric chemistry that are aimed at understanding the role of
particular materials as condensation and ice-freezing nuclei and in
influencing the dynamics and structures of clouds.27 Research objec-
tives of this program of NOAA's Atmospheric Physics and Chemis-
try Laboratory ( APCL) include : 28
1. Expanding current knowledge and documenting descriptions
of the behavior of extratropical weather systems ;
2. Improving the accuracy and detail in short-range predic-
tions— 24 hours or less — of both natural and modified severe
weather systems through development, verification, and refine-
ment of numerical mesoscale models ;
3. Identifying and testing, through numerical experiments
using the recently mesoscale model, modification hypotlieses, and
procedures that appear to inhibit or suppress severe attending
extratropical weather systems ;
4. Establishing data requirements for field programs including
observations needed for developing an understanding and a pre-
diction capability through numerical modelling ; and
5. Designing field modification experiments to test the most
promising hypotheses.
Research at APCL includes efforts to measure and define relation-
ships between numbers and chemical composition of natural and man-
made nuclei and aerosols and to determine their impact on cloud and
precipitation mechanisms. Nuclei inventories are made prior to, dur-
ing, and after cloud-seeding experiments to permit evaluation of the
efficiency of artificial nuclei generating techniques, their efficiency in
cloud glaciation, and atmospheric residence times. Research is also
directed toward optimization of cloud-seeding techniques and existing
analysis methods.29
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Introduction
The weather modification research, development, and operations
carried on by the Department, of Defense are intended primarily to
protect men and materials from environmental hazards and to be
aware of current and developing weather modification technologies
in order to avoid technological surprise by potential adversaries.30 31
Recent and planned expenditures by Defense for both operational and
research efforts in weather modification for fiscal year 1977 through
fiscal year 1979 are shown in table 17.
Air Force fog dispersal operations
The U.S. Air Force conducts the only operational weather modifi-
cation activities in the Department of Defense and the only regular
27 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
phric Seines. ICAS 18-FY75. 1974. pp. 77-78.
- Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences, ICAS 20-FY77, 1976. p. 89.
:» Ibid.
80 Ruggles, Kenneth \V., briefing on Department of Defense weather modification programs
for the Weather Modification Advisory Board. Washington. D.C.. May 31. 1977, p. 1.
yl See app. B for a statement of the current official position of the Department of Defense
on weather modification.
303
identifiable federally sponsored operational program. This Air Force
program provides a capability to dissipate cold fogs at two Air Force
bases — Fairchild AFB, Washington, and Elmendorf AFB, Alaska —
permitting use of these airfields and improvement of flight safety dur-
ing cold fog conditions. At these installations a ground-based disper-
sion system is used for spraying liquid propane into the atmosphere
upwind of the target area to be cleared. Vaporization of the propane
induces local cooling, with attendant formation and growth of ice
crystals at the expense of water droplets, dissipating the fog.32
A capability is also maintained by the Air Force for dispersal of
crushed dry ice from TTC-130 weather reconnaisance aircraft if the
need should arise for dissipation of cold fog at locations not equipped
with ground-based systems.
TABLE 17.— DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PLANNED EXPENDITURES FOR WEATHER MODIFICATION OPERATIONS
AND RESEARCH, FISCAL YEAR 1977 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 1979
•fin thousands of dollars]
Fiscal year—
1977
1978
1979
Operations: Air Force 1
53
82
70
Research and development: 2
Army: Cold fog dispersal..
237 .
Navy: Cold fog dispersal
226
210
Air Force:
Cold fog and stratus dispersal
Warm fog dispersal3
550
1,400
778
2, 200
714
1,200
Total, research and development.
2,413
3,188
1,914
•i Estimates of pro rated costs for operational cold fog dispersal at Air Force bases, from Capt. Kenneth W. Ruggles in brief-
ing on Department of Defense weather modification programs for the Weather Modification Advisory Board, May 31, 1977.
■ Data for basic research on weather modification differs from entries in table 2, based on 1977 inputs to ICAS; data
above on research and development were received Apr. 27, 1978, from Col. Elbert W. Friday, Office of the Under Secretary
of Defense for Research and Engineering.
3 Includes costs for engineering development of a warm fog dispersal system as well as expenditures for basic research
n warm fog dispersal.
The dry ice particles falling through the fog sublimate, causing a
large temperature decrease in their vicinity, so that the resulting ice
particles which form and grow at the expense of supercooled fog drop-
lets will fall out as snow. This capability has not been used since fiscal
year 1976, and the dry ice crushers are currently stored at Keesler
AFB, Miss. The Air Force plans continued use of these techniques,
however, to reduce adverse weather effects due to fog on airfield opera-
tions and flight safety.33
Army research and development
Research and development efforts in weather modification are con-
ducted by all three services in the Department of Defense to some
extent. Although the Army has terminated its technical base program,
one equipment item, a mobile cold fog dissipator, is in the engineering
32 Ruggles. briefing on Department of Defense weather modification programs for the
Weather Modification Advisory Board, 1977. p. 1.
33 Ibid., p. 2.
304
development phase.34 This gear, intended to provide a capability for
dissipating supercooled fog at Army airfields, helipads, and artillery
sites, employs the propane dispenser technology to remove fog in local
areas. The system is to be field tested in Alaska during 1978.35 Army
research on warm fogs, now terminated, had been directed toward
dispersal through a variety of possible techniques, including helicopter
downwash, use of hygroscopic materials, and application of heat.
Navy research and development
The research weather modification effort of the Navy is now con-
cerned with evaluation of weather modification experimental data and
of state-of-the-art techniques in order to avoid technological surprise.
Instruments and methods have been developed to study fog, clouds,
and natural weather processes, utilizing measurements of dewpoint,
liquid water distribution, cloud and fog droplet and ice particle sizes,
and number of cloud condensation nuclei. Recent investigations have
been directed toward generation, characterization, and evaluation of
active agents to inhibit or enhance the formation, growth, coalescence,
removal, and frequency of cloud and fog water droplets and toward
understanding the mechanisms and theories applicable to these proc-
esses. Numerical modeling of the fog or cloud system has been used to
design experiments and to define and evaluate the physical processes
which occur in field experiments.36
The principal ongoing Navy research program in weather modifica-
tion has been a statistical analysis to evaluate data from the Santa
Barbara cold cloud modification experiments.37 While not a large
effort, it is an important attempt to examine alternatives for reducing
uncertainty in evaluating weather modification experiments. No fur-
ther field experiments are currently planned by the Navy.38
In the recent past, the Navy has also sponsored major projects
related to warm fog modification. Field experiments were conducted
by the Naval Weapons Center, China Lake, Calif. ; computer simula-
tion studies have been underway at the Navy Environmental Predic-
tion Research Facility. Monetery, Calif.; the Naval Research Labo-
ratory, Washington, D.C., has been developing instrumentation and
conducting studies related to cloud particle and cloud nuclei prop-
erties; a standard evaluation site near Macon. Ga., was under develop-
ment; and the Office of Naval Research has provided support for a
variety of investigations.39
Air Force research and development
Air Force research projects in weather modification are currently
directed toward dispersal of warm fog and stratiform clouds. Devel-
34 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. ICAS 20-FY77. 1976. p. 91.
35 Ruggles. briefing on Department of Defense weather modification programs for the
Weather Modification Advisory Board. 1977. p. 2.
38 Federal Council for Science and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. ICAS 20-FY77. 1976. p. 91.
37 Ruggles. "Briefing on Department of Defense Weather Modification Programs for the
Weather Modification Advisory Board." 1977. p. 2. (The second Santa Barbara randomized
seeding project was conducted by North American Weather Consultants from 1967 through
1970. under contract to the Naval Weapons Center, China Lake, Calif.)
38 Ibid.
39 Moschandreas. Demetrios J.. "Present Capabilities To Modify Warm Fog and Stratus."
Geomet. Inc.. technical report for the Office of Naval Research and the Naval Air Systems
Command, contract No. N00014-71-C-0271, Geomet report No. EF-300, Jan. 18, 1974, p. 5.
305
opment of a prototype warm fog dispersal system planned for even-
tual installation at an Air Force base is underway. The system devel-
opment tests will be conducted at Otis AFB, Mass., and the field pro-
gram will be supplemented with modeling studies in order to develop
relationships between windspeed and the heat and thrust requirements
of the dispersal system.40
The system includes a number of combustors positioned along a
runway and its approaches. The burn rate of the combustors is to be
controlled precisely by a computer which monitors meteorological
instruments in the runway area.41 Such a system, using both heat and
thrust, is termed a thermokinetic system. The expected warming of
the air over runway and approaches by 2° to 3° C above ambient
temperature should result in lowering the relative humidity and
evaporation of the fog droplets. Figure 16 shows the expected clear-
ing geometry for the system. Upon successful completion of the field
tests in 1979, it is expected that an operational warm fog dispersal
system will be designed and installed at an Air Force base by 1982.42
The bulk of the Air Force research funding shown in table 17 covers
development and testing of this system at Otis Air Force Base.43
Figure 16. Clearing Geometry of the Warm Fog Dispersal System, Under De-
velopment by the U.S. Air Force. (From Kunkel. The Design of a Warm Fog
Dispersal System. 1977.)
Another Air Force project is directed toward development of an
operational technique for dispersal of supercooled stratus clouds. Field
40 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. ICAS 20-FY77. 1976. p. 91.
41 Ruggles, "Briefing on Department of Defense Weather Modification Programs for the
Weather Modification Advisory Board, ' 1977, p. 3.
42 Kunkel. Bruce A.. "The Design of a Warm Fog Dispersal System," Sixth Conference on
Plannpd and Inadvertent Weather Modification, American Meteorological Society, Cham-
paign-Urbana, 111., Oct. 10-13, 1977, pp. 174-176.
43 Ruggles, "Briefing on the Department of Defense Weather Modification Programs for
the Weather Modification Advisory Board, 1977, p. 3.
306
experiments and numerical modeling will be used to estimate quanti-
ties and types of seeding materials suitable for dispersal under a wide
range of meteorological conditions.44 Under the auspices of the Air
Force Geophysics Laboratory, field tests on supercooled stratus dis-
persal were conducted during February 1977 in Michigan, using a
dispensing system which deployed silver iodide. The objective of these
tests was to produce clearing over a predetermined ground target. In
all cases, except when the minimum cloud temperature was greater
than —6° C, clearings were effected. The tests demonstrated that such
clearings can be produced with a small lightweight delivery system
adaptable for use on tactical aircraft and that targeting is not a
serious problem. At a steep elevation angle ground targets were clearly
visible after clearing, but they were obscured by residual glaciated
clouds in the clearings when the look angle was more shallow. It is
considered possible that some of the residual might have been due to
overseeding. In another planned series of tests, attempts will be made
to optimize the seeding rate to improve visibilities in the cleared area.
Other seeding materials such as formaldehyde and propane, which are
active in the 0° C to — 6° C temperature range, will also be tested,
since silver iodide is not active above —6° C. A theoretical study is
also planned to determine the effects various forms of radiant energy
could have on dispersal of warm stratus clouds.45
0 verseas operations
In recent years there had been much concern on the part of the
Congress and the American public over the use of weather modifica-
tion as a weapon of war in the war in Vietnam. A full disclosure of
these activities and a discussion of their effectiveness were provided
by the Defense Department in hearings before the Senate Committee
on Foreign Relations in 1974.46 In a recent briefing before the U.S.
Commerce Departments National Weather Modification Advisory
Board, it was stated that the current weather modification activities of
the Department of Defense ';are in accord with the provisions of the
Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use
of Environmental Modification Techniques, signed at Geneva on May
18, 1977.?; 47' 48
44 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. ICAS 20-FY77, 1976, p. 91.
4" Ruggles. "Briefing on Department of Defense Weather Modification Programs for the
Weather Modification Advisory Board, ' 1977, pp. 3—4.
46 U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations, Subcommittee on Oceans and
International Environment. "The Need for an International Agreement Prohibiting the Use
of Environmental and Geophysical Modification as Weapons of War and Briefing on Depart-
ment of Defense Weather Modification Activity.' hearing, 93d Cong.. 2d sess.. Jan. 25 and
Mar. 20. 1974. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1974. 123 pp. (Contains
the top secret hearing held on Mar. 20. 1974. which was made public on May 19. 1974.)
*' IUiggles. "Briefing on Department of Defense Weather Modification Programs for the
Weather Modification Advisory Board." 1977. p. 4.
48 A full discussion of the developments leading to the signing of this convention is con-
tained in ch. 10 of the report, entitled "International Aspects of Weather Modification."
The full text of the draft treaty is in app. C
307
Perhaps less well known than the use of weather modification in
Vietnam were the attempts at precipitation enhancement for beneficial
purposes carried out by the U.S. Air Force in the Philippine Islands at
the request of the Philippine Government, This rain enhancement
project, named GROMET II, was conducted from April through
June of 1969, using airborne pyrotechnic seeding devices. The Air
Force had operational responsibility for the project, while the Naval
Weapons Center provided technical direction, and cooperation was
also provided by Philippine agencies. Although precise determination
of increased rainfall resulting from seeding was not possible, it was
concluded, nevertheless, that rainfall augmentation from tropical
cumulus clouds was accomplished in a simple operational manner.
Benefits derived from the project included improvement in the agri-
culture, increased sugar production, and augmented crops of rice and
corn. In addition, local personnel were trained in seeding operations,
and, owing to the success of GROMET II, the Government of the
Philippines conducted similar operations in subsequent years.49 Other
operational attempts to assist in drought mitigation were conducted by
the Air Force in Panama, Portugal, and Okinawa.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
The weather modification research and development activities of the
Department of Transportation have been conducted by the Federal
Aviation Agency (FAA), whose interest has been focused on warm
fog dispersal and the development of systems for the removal of such
fogs from airport runways. The current modest effort by the FAA is
concerned with monitoring the U.S. Air Force development program
for a warm fog dispersal system 50 and with considerations of imple-
menting recommendations of a major FAA-sponsored warm fog
dispersal systems study which was completed recently.51
The FAA engineering report was completed in November 1975, fol-
lowing a 2-year study by an in-house task force that was charged with
determining the feasibility of a ground-based warm fog dispersal
system for a selected U.S. airport. The study included preparation of
a conceptual design and cost estimates for the proposed system. Given
that the actual mechanisms to be used for fog clearings had to be both
theoretically and operationally sound, the task force eliminated a
number of more exotic schemes and concentrated on design and cost
estimates for two candidate fog dispersal approaches — (1) a modified
passive thermal fog dispersal system and (2) a thermokinetic fog dis-
49 St. Amand. Pierre. D. W. Reed. T. L. Wright, and S.D. Elliott, "GROMET II : Rainfall
Augmentation in the Philippine Islands," Naval Weapons Center, NWC TP 5097, China
Lake. Calif.. May 1971. 110 pp.
50 See discussion of weather modification research and development activities of the De-
partment of Defense, beginning on p. 303.
51 FAA Systems Research and Development Service, fog dispersal task team, "Ground-
based Warm Fog Dispersal Systems: Technique Selection and Feasibility Determination
with Cost Estimates," Federal Aviation Administration, report No. FAA-RD-75-126. Final
report. Washington, D.C, November 1975, 67 pp.
308
persal system. Both systems depend on evaporation of the fog as a
result of a small temperature rise; however, whereas in the one case
the natural convective forces of the heated atmosphere and the winds
are relied upon to mix and transport the heat energy throughout the
fog, the thermokinetic technique uses jet engines to transport the
heated air into the fog by thrust. The latter technique produces some
turbulence but not to a disqualifying degree.52 In selecting an airport
it was thought important that there be a high annual occurrence of
fog and a high air traffic density during the hours of fog for the sys-
tem to be cost-effective. From 38 U.S. airports that were screened as
potential candidates, Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) was
selected as the airport which, in 1981, would gain the highest poten-
tial benefit from a fog dispersal system located along one of its run-
ways.53 Figure 17 shows the preliminary configuration of a single
line of burners for a fog dispersal system installed along runway 25L
at LAX. Costs for such an installation are of the order of $10 million,
but would vary, depending on the kind of system selected and the cate-
gory of landing clearance for which the system is designed. Cost-to-
benefit ratios vary accordingly, but the study showed that 15 U.S. air-
ports turned out to have at least a 1 :1 cost /benefit ratio.
NORTH
LAX - RUNWAY 25L
LINE SECTION HEAT GENERATOR OUTPUT (Therms/Yd. Hr . )
A - 5000 ft. 5 to 30
B - 1847 ft. 9 to 55
C - 1847 ft. 17 to 100
D - 1856 ft. 20 to 120
E - 814 ft. 13 to 80
D.H. = Decision Height
TOTAL HEAT GENERATOR LINE LENGTH - 19274 ft. for CAT I, line sections A, B, C, D.
14504 ft. for CAT II, line sections A, B. E.
Figure 17. — Preliminary configuration of proposed single line of burners for
warm fog dispersal system for runway 25L at Los Angeles International Air-
port. (From Department of Transportation report FAA-RD-75-136, by FAA
Fog Dispersal System Task Team, 1975.)
The FAA has contemplated participation in a joint warm fog dis-
persal demonstration project with Los Angeles International Airport
and the U.S. Air Force; however, such a project has not yet been
■ Ibid., p. 6.
63 Ibid., pp. 10-13.
309
agreed upon. In discussions with the Air Transport Association on
this program, the FAA has learned about the concern of the associa-
tion about increased landing fees to finance the system.54
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
The Forest Service within the Department of Agriculture has car-
ried on weather modification research aimed at development of meth-
ods for suppressing cloud-to-ground lightning activity as a means
of reducing forest fires in the intermountain west. Forest protection
agencies developed early interest in possible application of weather
modification to the forest-fire problem, first by considering the possi-
bility of increasing moisture through rainfall on dry forests or on the
fires directly and, later, by examining the potential for reducing di-
rectly the fire-starting capabilities of lightning itself.
The Forest Service established in 1953 a long-range program of
lightning research, called Project Skyfire, as part of its overall fire
research program. Project Skyfire has been the oldest continuously
performed weather modification program in the United States until its
recent demise.55 Two broad objectives of the project were (1) to obtain
a better understanding of the occurrence and characteristics of light-
ning storms and lightning fires in the northern Rocky Mountain region
and (2) to investigate the possibility of preventing or reducing the
number of lightning fires by applying techniques of weather modifica-
tion.56
After several years of gaining basic information about mountain
thunderstorms, the first cloud seeding experiments were conducted
under Skyfire in 1956 in the San Francisco peaks area of Arizona,57
Beginning in 1960 field programs were conducted for a number of
summer seasons in the mountainous areas of western Montana. These
programs included both experiments designed to test the effects of
seeding on lightning frequency and the development of techniques for
observation and careful measurement of the characteristics of light-
ning strokes. A portion of the research during the 1960's was jointly
sponsored by the Forest Service and the National Science Founda-
tion.58 Other participants in Skyfire have included the National
Weather Service, the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land
Management, several universities, and commercial contractors. Results
of these experiments were encouraging but have not been conclusive.
Field and laboratory experiments have shown the relationship of ice
crystals to the lightning process. Skyfire field experiments seemed to
show about one-third fewer cloud-to-ground lightning strokes for
54 Bromley. Edmond. briefing on the Department of Transportation weather modification
program before the Department of Commerce National Weather Modification Advisory
Board. May 31. 1977.
55 Barrows. J. S., "Preventing Fire From the Sky." Yearbook Separare No. 3589 (reprinted
from the 1968 Yearbook of Agriculture), U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, U.S.
Government Printing Office. 1968. p. 219.
58 Fuquay, Donald M. and Robert G. Baughman, "Project Skyfire Lightning Research,"
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service, final report to National Science Foundation,
Missoula. Mont. December 1969. p. 3.
57 Barrows, "Preventing Fire From the Sky," 1968. p. 221.
58 Fuquay and Baughman, "Project Skyfire Lightning Research," 1969, p. 3.
310
seeded clouds. Later experiments were carried out in Alaska in 1973 in
cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management. While efforts in
Montana had been concentrated on the long continuing current light-
ning stroke which seemed to be the most destructive, results in Alaska
indicated that fires could be started there with shorter strokes because
the ground cover was more combustible. Thus, the Montana results
were not transferable.59
All field experiments in weather modification under Project Sky-
fire were terminated in 1973, since they were not considered to be cost-
effective, and work subsequent to that time has been concentrated on
analysis of data from previous experiments and on reporting to fire
protection agencies on the prospects for lightning suppression. With
conclusion of this wrap-up work during 1977, the Forest Service pro-
poses no further research in weather modification in the immediate
future.60
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Weather modification research in this Department is concerned only
with inadvertent changes to weather and climate as a result of man's
activities related to energy development and consumption. Reporting
of this research through the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences (ICAS) as weather modification was begun with
fiscal year 1975 funding by the former Energy Research and Develop-
ment Administration (ERDA), recognizing that a significant amount
of research on inadvertent modification of weather and climate had
been part of their agency effort.61
Within the former agency's atmospheric science program, pertinent
studies address atmospheric chemistry of energy production pollutants,
removal processes, interactions with atmospheric processes, radioactive
properties of the atmosphere, and the effects of waste heat and moisture
from energy production. As part of the METROMEX field studies in
the St. Louis area,62 research on urban aerosols and precipitation com-
position was conducted under ERDA support by the Illinois State
Water Survey and the Batelle Pacific Northern Laboratories. The
ERDA Divisions of Biomedical and Environmental Research and of
Nuclear Research and Applications developed a program during
fiscal year 1976 to investigate the atmospheric impacts of waste heat
and moisture rejection from proposed energy centers containing both
nuclear and fossil fuel generating units. The Biomedical and Environ-
mental Research Division is also developing a program to learn the
effects on atmospheric processes in the Western States resulting from
59 Roberts. Charles F., briefing on the Department of Agriculture weather modification
program before the Department of Commerce National Weather Modification Advisory
Board. May 31. 1977.
Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences. ICAS 20-FY77, 1976. p. 88.
61 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences, ICAS 20-FY77. 1976, p. 94.
82 See earlier discussion of the weather modification activities of the National Science
Foundation for a more complete account of METROMEX, p. 283ff.
311
increased stack emissions and resuspended aerosols during extraction
of coal and oil shale processing.63
The Division of Biomedical and Environmental Research has also
established a carbon dioxide effects research program to provide a na-
tional focus for research and assessment of the potential for possible
problems relating to carbon dioxide accumulation rates. This compre-
hensive research program is being developed to determine the physical,
environmental, and social implications of inadvertent weather and
climate modification resulting from increased carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere. 64
63 Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences, ICAS 20-FY77. p. 94.
84 Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology, Interdepart-
mental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences, ICAS 21-FY78, 1976, p. 92.
CHAPTER 6
REVIEW OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A NATIONAL
PROGRAM IN WEATHER MODIFICATION
(By James E. Mielke, Analyst in Marine and Earth Sciences, Science Policy
Research Division, Congressional Research Service)
Introduction
A number of major studies have been undertaken over the past 25
years in an effort to determine and review the status of the Federal
role in weather modification. Eight of these studies which resulted in
reports presenting findings and recommendations for actions have been
selected for review and the recommendations summarized. Some of the
studies were mandated by Congress through passage of public laws.
Others were initiated by agencies or interagency committees of the
executive branch, two of these were prepared by the National Academy
of Sciences. One study was conducted by the General Accounting Of-
fice. In chronological order, the selected major reports containing
weather modification recommendations are as follows:
1. U.S. Advisory Committee on Weather Control, "Final Report of
the Advisory Committee on Weather Control," Washington, D.C.,
U.S. Government Printing Office, December 31, 1957. In two volumes,
32 and 422 pages.
2. Special Commission on Weather Modification. "Weather and
Climate Modification," report of the Special Commission on Weather
Modification, Washington, D.C., National Science Foundation, 1966,
NSF 66-7, 79 pages.
3. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Com-
mittee on Atmospheric Sciences, "Weather and Climate Modification :
Problems and Prospects," publication No. 1350, Washington, D.C.,
1966, in two volumes, 40 and 212 pages.
4. Newell, Homer E., "A Recommended National Program in
Weather Modification," Federal Council for Science and Technology,
Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences, ICAS report
No. 10a, Washington, D.C., November 1966, 93 pages.
5. Federal Council for Science and Technology, Interdepartmental
Committee for Atmospheric Sciences, "A National Program for Ac-
celerating Progress in Weather Modification," ICAS report No. 15a,
Washington, D.C., June 1971, 50 pages.
6. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Com-
mittee on Atmospheric Sciences, "Weather Modification: Problems
and Progress," ISBN 0-309-02121-9, Washington, D.C., 1973, 280
pages.
7. Comptroller General of the United States, "Need for a National
Weather Modification Research Program," Report to the Congress,
(313)
314
B-133202, Washington, D.C., General Accounting Office, August 23,
1974, 64 pages.
8. U.S. Domestic Council, Environmental Kesources Committee,
Subcommittee on Climate Change, "The Federal Hole in Weather
Modification," Washington, D.C., 1975, 39 pages.
In addition to the above reports, the annual reports of the National
Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA) fre-
quently contain recommendations on weather modification. These rec-
ommendations are summarized and the second annual NACOA report
is cited in particular :
National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere, "Second
Annual Report to the President and Congress," Washington, D.C.,
U.S. Government Printing Office, June 29, 1973, 47 pages.
Summaries of Major Weather Modification Reports
The purpose of this section is to trace the evolution of recommenda-
tions for Federal action as expressed in a number of major weather
modification reports. The reports summarized in this section are not
intended to be inclusive of all major weather modification studies. Only
those reports primarily containing recommendations directing Federal
activities have been selected. Other policy orientated reports, such as
some of those sponsored by the American Meteorological Society, are
available but, in general, these are focused less strongly on recom-
mendations for the Federal role. Quotations contained in the report
summaries of the following sections are from the respective report
under consideration in that section.1
FINAL REPORT OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON WEATHER CONTROL
The Advisory Committee on Weather Control was established by
act of Congress in 1953. The Committee was directed to make "a com-
plete study and evaluation of public and private experiments in
weather control for the purpose of determining the extent to which
the United States should experiment with, engage in, or regulate
activities designed to control weather conditions." The final report of
this Committee, submitted in 1957, contained the following findings
and recommendations :
(1) That encouragement be given for the widest possible competent research
in meteorology and related fields. Such research should be undertaken by Govern-
ment agencies, universities, industries, and other organizations.
(2) That the Government sponsor meteorological research more vigorously
than at present. Adequate support is particularly needed to maintain continuity
and reasonable stability for long-term projects.
(3) That the administration of Government-sponsored research provide free-
dom and latitude for choosing methods and goals. Emphasis should be put on
sponsoring talented men as well as their specific projects.
(4) That an agency be designated to promote and support research in the
needed fields, and to coordinate research projects. It should also constitute a
central point for the assembly, evaluation, and dissemination of information.
This agency should be the National Science Foundation.
(5) That whenever a research project has the endorsement of the National
Science Foundation and requires facilities to achieve its purpose, the agency
having jurisdiction over such facilities should provide them.
1 See preceding list of reports for complete references.
315
In addition the Committee recommended the initiation of a general
meteorological research program to develop large numbers of highly
qualified research scientists working along the following lines :
(1) The effect of solar disturbances on weather.
(2) The factors which control our global atmospheric circulation.
(3) The factors which govern the genesis and movement of large-scale storms.
(4) The dynamics of cloud motions.
(5) The processes of rain and snow formation, and the relative importance
of the physical phenomena which govern these processes.
(6) The electrification process in clouds, and the role electricity plays in
meteorological phenomena.
(7) The natural sources of condensation and ice-forming nuclei, and their role.
(8) The methods, materials, and equipment employed in weather modification.
As a result of these recommendations, the Xational Science Founda-
tion (XSF) was directed by Public Law 85-510 of July 10, 1958, to
initiate and support a program of study, research, and evaluation in
the field of weather modification. The XSF established a research pro-
gram as directed and, in effect, served as lead agency for weather modi-
fication until 1968, when this specific role was removed from the XSF
by Public Law 90-107.
WEATHER AND CLIMATE MODIFICATION ; REPORT OF THE SPECIAL
COMMISSION OX WEATHER MODIFICATION
In 1964 the Director of the Xational Science Foundation appointed
the Special Commission on Weather Modification. The Commission
was assigned to "fulfill the need of the Xational Science Foundation
for a review of the state of knowledge on weather and climate modifi-
cation, make recommendations concerning future policies and pro-
grams and examine the adequacy of the Foundation's program." The
Commission's assignment included consideration of not only the scien-
tific aspects but also the legal, social and political problems in the
field. The Commission's report was released in 1966.
In general the report concluded that there were four basic research
needs to be met in weather modification :
1. Assessment and development of an understanding of natural climatic change.
2. Assessment of the extent and development of the understanding of inad-
vertent modifications of weather and climate.
3. Improvement of the process of weather prediction.
4. Development of means for deliberate intervention in atmospheric processes
for weather and climate control and evaluation of their consequences.
As steps toward attaining these pursuits the Commission recom-
mended that the following enterprises be fostered :
1. Examination of the routes, rates and reservoirs of water substance and
energy exchanges in all aspects of the hydrologic cycle.
2. Investigation by numerical laboratory and field experiments of the dynamics
of climate as a basic study for weather modification technology.
3. Advancement of weather prediction as a proof of understanding, including
support of this effort by the establishment of a global weather observation
network.
4. Broadening of the knowledge of cloud physics and dynamics in the laboratory
and field, with attention to wave phenomena and an evaluation of electrical
influences.
5. Study of the effects of large scale surface modification by numerical and
laboratory models of the oceanic and atmospheric general circulation, and of
practical means for surface modification of the land and sea.
6. Study of the radiative effects of changes in the atmospheric composition
and alteration of its transparency that urban growth and new forms of indus-
try transportation or land use may evoke.
316
With regard to biological implications of weather modification, the
Commission stated that there should be a strong effort to bring the
field of biological forecasting up to a higher level of usefulness. In
order to improve biological forecasting, several approaches should be
brought to bear on the problem including growth chamber simulation,
computer modeling, study of the fine structure in the fossil record of
the recent past, and examination and monitoring of areas biologically
and climatically analogous to the changed and unchanged situations.
The Commission also recommended that greater use be made of
statisticians in analyzing Government-sponsored research in weather
modification and that statistics be given greater emphasis in related
academic programs for meteorologists. In addition, there is a need
to assess more fully the social and economic implications of weather
modification experimentation, and all agencies engaged in weather
modification attempts should give attention to the social implications.
With regard to the legal system, the Commission recommended that
the Federal Government be empowered by appropriate legislation to :
(a) delay or halt all activities — public or private — in actual or poten-
tial conflict with weather and climate modification programs of the
Federal Government; (b) immunize Federal agents, grantees, and
contractors engaged in weather and climate modification activities
from State and local government interference; and (c) provide to
Federal grantees and contractors indemnification or other protection
against liability to the public for damages caused by Federal programs
of weather and climate modification.
In the area of international relations, the Commission recommended
the enunciation of a national policy embodying two main points :
(1) that it is the purpose of the United States, with normal and due
regard to its own basic interests, to pursue its efforts in weather and
climate modification for peaceful ends and for the constructive im-
provement of conditions of human life throughout the world: and
(2) the United States, recognizing the interests and concerns of other
countries, welcomes and solicits their cooperation, directly and through
international arrangements, for the achievement of that objective.
In light of the above program, the Commission considered that
Federal funding for weather modification should be increased sub-
stantiallv from approximately $7.2 million in fiscal year 1966 to a
total of $40 million or $50 million per year by 1970. This would include
substantially increased support for basic research and development in
weather and climate modification, large field experiments of both a
basic and an applied nature, and development of a strong centralized
group, such as could be provided by a national laboratory, to serve as
a focal point for research and development.
The Commission further determined that no single agency in the
Federal Government has the responsibility for developing the tech-
nology of weather and climate modification and that the need for such
designation was becoming evident. The Commission took the position
that the mission of developing and testing techniques for modifying
weather and climate should bo assigned to an agency such as the Envi-
ronmental Science Services Administration (ESS A), now part of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), or to
a completely new agency organized for the purpose. In addition the
317
National Science Foundation should continue and expand its support
of research in the atmospheric sciences, including weather modifica-
tion. Furthermore, other Federal agencies should remain free to con-
duct and support such research and development as may be required
in the discharge of their missions. Finally, the Commission recom-
mended that the Office of Science and Technology establish a mech-
anism for resolving conflicts between agencies with regard to weather
modification activities and that an advisory committee on weather
modification be established within the National Academy of Sciences.
WEATHER AND CLIMATE MODIFICATION PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS
In November 1963, the Committee on Atmospheric Sciences of the
National Academy of Sciences appointed a panel on weather and
climate modification "to undertake a deliberate and thoughtful re-
view of the present status and activities in this field, and of its potential
and limitations for the future." Volume I of the panel's final report
contains a summary of the status of weather and climate modifica-
tion, suggestions for essential research, and recommendations for ac-
tions to insure orderly and rapid future progress. While legal, social,
and economic questions were considered important, they were not
within the area of responsibility of the Academy panel.
The panel concluded that the present fragmentation of effort in
weather modification research and development is unusual for the
environmental sciences in that many of the fragments were below
critical size or quality needed for effective work, and that major
responsibility for weather modification should be centered in a single
agency; at the same time, however, a degree of delegated responsi-
bility should be maintained that will allow other agencies to meet
their mission requirements for work in this field. A sixfold increase
in Federal support from $5 million in 1965 to $30 million in 1970 was
recommended. The panel considered a number of possible administra-
tive arrangements for the support of weather modification research
including (1) a national laboratory for weather modification; (2) a
lead agency, either existing or new, with prime responsibility for
weather modification; or (3) multiagency sharing of mission respon-
sibility. However, the panel declined to make a firm statement as to
the most desirable administrative means of achieving the goals 9et
out in the report.
A number of projects in precipitation stimulation were recommended
including: (1) Early establishment of several carefully designed seed-
ing experiments, planned in such a way as to permit assessment of
the seedability of a variety of storm types, (2) develop better means
than are currently available to evaluate operational programs, and
(3) give immediate attention to careful monitoring and regulation of
operational programs for weather modification.
Other field investigations were recommended including: (1) A com-
prehensive exploration of hurricane dynamics leading to a hypothesis
for hurricane modification, (2) measurement of tropical convection
and other aspects of energy exchange in the tropics, (3) a comprehen-
sive investigation of hailstorms, and (4) a study of the water budgets
of a variety of precipitating storm types.
318
The specific research areas of greatest promise that the panel rec-
ommended should receive the highest priority were : (1) Studies of at-
mospheric water budgets and vapor transport over those areas of the
United States where the potential for cloud seeding is important. (2)
studies of boundary-layer energy exchange processes, (3) development
of theoretical models of condensation and precipitation, and (4) stud-
ies of the meteorological effects of atmospheric pollution, including
carbon dioxide and urbanization.
The need for enhancement or establishment of certain support sys-
tems and research facilities was also noted. In particular the panel
noted that the best computer just then becoming available had only
one-fiftieth of the effective speed needed to meet the growing compu-
tational requirements of meteorological research, and, consequently,
the panel recommended that all necessary steps be taken to encourage
the computer industry to respond to these requirements. In addition,
the panel recommended that civil research aircraft facilities be en-
larged to include diversified types of aircraft and supporting data-
gathering systems to meet the requirements placed upon them by large
field research programs in atmospheric sciences and weather modifica-
tion.
The panel also recommended that full U.S. support and leadership
be given in establishing an advanced global-observational system, and
that the Federal agency assigned major administrative responsibili-
ties in weather and climate modification also be empowered to deal with
the complex international issues arising from weather modification
projects.
A RECOMMENDED NATIONAL PROGRAM IN WEATHER MODIFICATION
ICAS (Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences)
report No. 10a was prepared by Dr. Homer E. Xewell in response to a
request to formulate a national weather modification program along
the lines delineated in the report of the ICAS Select Panel on Weather
Modification titled '"President and Future Plans of Federal Agencies
in Weather-Climate Modification-' (included as app. Ill in ICAS
Rept. Xo. 10a). The weather modification program developed was
based on analysis of existing agency programs and needed expansion
of activities including budget support. The following principles were
amon<r those developed which underlie the program recommendations :
1. There is sufficient potential payoff indicated by the results of past
research to justify continuing basic and applied research in the area of
weather modification.
2. The potential dollar savings in lessening the destructive effects of
weather, and the potential gains in enhancing the beneficial effects,
are so great that expenditures of appreciable dollars on weather modi-
fication research and application can be justified.
3. There is a need for a single agency to assume responsibility for
taking the lead in developing a well-rounded national program of re-
search on weather modification.
4. It is desirable to maintain a multiple-agency approach to weather
modification, and each agency's basic mission should determine its role
in weather modification, but not to the exclusion of basic research.
5. Interagency cooperation and support is essential.
319
6. A formal procedure must be developed to achieve continuing visi-
bility and coordination of the total weather modification program.
7. There must be regulation and control of weather modification ac-
tivities, especially as these become of greater magnitude and interna-
tional in scope.
ICAS report 10a recommended that the major thrust of the national
program in weather modification for the immediate future be in the
direction of understanding the physics and dynamics of weather sys-
tems to provide a sound basis for experimentation in, and application
of, weather modification. The report also found that the budget figures
and program expansion plans developed by the ICAS select panel to
be about twice as high as might be realistic. (The ICAS select panel
had envisioned growth in Federal funding for weather modification
programs from $9.3 million in 1967 to $146.8 million in 1970.)
Report 10a recommended that weather modification be coordinated
(in the sense of providing all concerned with a continuing visibility
of the whole national weather modification effort) by the Office of the
Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and Supporting Re-
search. However, it was not intended to give the Federal Coordinator
responsibility for program planning and control, which would remain
the responsibility of the operating agencies and under the review of
ICAS. A body for regulating weather modification activities was
deemed necessary, but no recommendation was made as to a specific
organization. The view was expressed that it should not be one of the
operating agencies participating in the national weather modification
program, nor should it be the Office of the Federal Coordinator be-
cause of the ambivalent relationship existing between that office and
■ESSA. In addition, ICAS would not have the means to perform the
regulatory function.
The report recognized that international impacts may arise through
weather modification activities and suggested that a practical and con-
structive approach to reducing possible conflicts would be through bi-
lateral or multilateral agreements. In these, the United States should
seek to establish mutual interest in large-scale experiments.
The report concentrated on four agencies — the Department of Agri-
culture, ESSA (now part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration), the Interior Department's Bureau of Reclamation,
and the National Science Foundation (NSF) — which together would
represent over 98 percent of the total national weather modification
activity in 1970.
With regard to the program developed for the Department of Agri-
culture, there were two major categories: (1) Direct modification of
weather, and (2) ecological and supporting research. These relate pri-
marily to the suppression of specific harmful effects of weather phe-
nomena, and a study of the effects of weather modification upon farm
and forest crops, and on land management in general.
The single objective of the Department of Interior's atmospheric
water resources program was to ascertain the technical and economic
feasibility of increasing the water supply for Bureau of Reclamation
projects through weather modification. Research results showed suffi-
cient promise that the ICAS report recommended the program should
be reoriented to reflect the eventual goal of the effective, beneficial
utilization of the Nation's atmospheric water resources.
320
The report recommended that ESSA pursue a broad research and
development effort which is essential to a viable national weather
modification program, supplementing and integrating the research
programs of the mission-orientated agencies. In particular, the ESSA
program should focus on such areas as severe storm suppression, hur-
ricane modification, and large-scale atmospheric modeling.
The ICAS report supported the proposition that NSF should in-
crease the support of basic and closely associated applied research,
which is appropriate and fundamental to any program of weather
modification. The NSF program should be directed toward three ob-
jectives: (1) The establishment of a sound scientific foundation for
an intensified program of weather modification, (2) the substantial in-
volvement of universities in this area of research, and (3) the produc-
tion of substantial numbers of highly trained people for this work.
A NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR ACCELERATING PROGRESS IN
WEATHER MODIFICATION
ICAS report No. 15a, prepared in 1971, proposed a program for ac-
celerating national progress in the modification of weather through
consolidation of a number of prime Government weather modification
efforts into seven key projects. A lead agency was designated for each
of the proposed national projects. The national projects were defined
as multiagency efforts of major national significance, which were con-
sidered to have near-term potential for meeting identified national
needs. Each had as a base an ongoing weather modification program
with a potential for making a vital contribution to the solution of a
national problem.
The national projects were designed to learn about physical mecha-
nisms and to test scientific concepts, except for one with the special
designation of pilot project. The pilot project was concerned with the
development of efficient operational techniques and the process of de-
cisionmaking. These national projects were designed so that different
departments with differing missions would advance their own as well
as broader national interests by formal collaboration with one another.
The proposed national projects and lead agencies were:
1. National Colorado River Basin pilot project, Bureau of Reclama-
tion, to test the feasibility of applying a cloud-seeding technology,
proven effective under certain conditions, to a river basin for a winter
season to augment the seasonal snowpack.
2. National hurricane modification project, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, to develop a seeding technology and as-
sociated mathematical models to reduce the maximum surface winds
associated with hurricanes.
3. National lightning suppression project, Forest Service, to develop
a seeding technology and associated physical and mathematical
models to reduce the frequency of forest fire-starting lightning strokes
from cumulonimbus clouds.
4. National cumulus modification project, National Oceanic and At-
mospheric Administration, to develop a seeding technology and as-
sociated mathematical models to promote the growth of cumulus
clouds in order to increase the resulting natural rainfall in areas where
needed.
321
5. National hail research experiment, National Science Foundation,
to develop a seeding technology and associated mathematical models
to reduce the incidence of damaging hailfall from cumulonimbus
clouds without adversely affecting the associated rainfall.
6. National Great Lakes snow redistribution project, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, to develop a seeding tech-
nology and associated mathematical models to spread the heavy snow-
fall of the Great Lakes coastal region farther inland.
7. National fog modification project, Federal Aviation Administra-
tion, to develop seeding or other technology and associated physical
and mathematical models to improve the visibility in warm and cold
fogs where and to the extent needed.
In addition to the special support needed for these national projects,
a significant increase in relevant broad background research and de-
velopment support would be needed. In this regard, the areas of nuclei
counting and efficiency assessment, the physical chemistry of nucleat-
ing agents, the microphysics and dynamics of mesoscale systems, meso-
scale mathematical models, and cloud physics instrumentation, such as
doppler radars and microwave sensors, were singled out in particular.
Specific recommendations were also made to establish a national de-
pository for weather modification data, for the study of and effective
handling of the socioeconomic legal aspects for the future, and for
certain ecological and hydrological studies to be performed.
WEATHER AND CLIMATE MODIFICATIONS : PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS
In 1973 the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) published a
second report on weather and climate modification which reviewed
progress since the 1966 report and made further recommendations for
a Federal program. Three definite research goals were recommended
to form the principal objective of the Nation's weather modification
program :
1. Identification by the year 1980 of the conditions under which precipitation
can be increased, decreased, and redistributed in various climatological areas
through the addition of artificial ice and condensation nuclei ;
£. Development in the next decade of technology directed toward mitigating
the effects of the following weather hazards : hurricanes, hailstorms, fogs, and
lighting ;
3. Establishment of a coordinated national and international system for in-
vestigating the inadvertent effects of manmade pollutants, with a target date
of 1980 for the determination of the extent, trend, and magnitude of the effect
of various crucial pollutants on local weather conditions and on the climate of
the world.
A program to achieve these goals would contain many elements. In
this regard, several recommendations were presented in the NAS re-
port. These included :
1. More adequate laboratory and experimental field programs would
be needed to study the microphysical processes associated with the de-
velopment of clouds, precipitation, and thunderstorm electrification.
2. There was a need to develop numerical models to describe the be-
havior of cloud systems. Existing work had dealt mainly with isolated
cumulus clouds.
3. A need was identified for the standardization of instrumentation
in seeding devices and the testing of new seeding agents.
322
4. There should be established a number of weather modification
statistical research groups associated with the major held groups con-
cerned with weather modification and the inadvertent effects of pol-
lutants.
5. NOAA should create a repository for data on weather modifica-
tion activities and, at a suitable price, make available for reanalysis
complete data on these activities.
6. A continuing need was identified for a comprehensive series of
randomized experiments to determine the effects of both artificial and
natural ice and cloud condensation nuclei on precipitation in the prin-
cipal meteorological regimes of the United States.
7. Further investigations into the feasibility of redistributing win-
ter precipitation were needed.
8. Evaluation of the effects of seeding on precipitation outside the
area of seeding was needed.
9. Studies of the effects of artificial seeding on cumulus clouds and
the numerical modeling of the seeding process should be continued
and expanded.
10. Investigations should be made to determine whether the seeding
techniques presently used in the study of isolated cumulus clouds and
in hurricane modification can be extended to the amelioration of severe
thunderstorms, hailstorms, and even tornadoes.
11. An expanded program was needed to provide continuous forma-
tion-to-decay observations of hurricanes from above, around, within,
and beneath seeded and nonseeded hurricanes and for testing new
techniques for reducing hurricane intensities.
12. A major national effort in fundamental research on hailstorms
and hailstorm modification should be pursued aggressively.
13. A research program dealing with fog dissipation should be un-
dertaken.
14. There was a need to develop a variety of research techniques for
observing severe storms.
15. National and international programs should be developed for
monitoring atmospheric changes and pollutants resulting from man's
activities.
16. Satellite programs should be developed to monitor on a global
basis, the cloud cover, albedo, and the heat balance of the atmosphere.
17. Enlarged programs were needed to measure climatic differences
between cities and adjoining countrysides and to determine the
mechanisms responsible.
18. Continued strong support should be provided for the global
atmospheric research program now underway to model properly the
global atmosphere-ocean system.
The XAS report recognized that three major functions must be
provided within the Federal organizational structure to achieve these
goals. First, at this stage in the development of the field, there must
be support for many basic studies at universities in the relevant aspects
of the atmospheric sciences, biological sciences, social sciences, engi-
neering, and public policy. Second, the mission oriented agencies must
maintain their weather modification programs. Finally, an agency
that lias the scientific and management competence, the dedication,
and the resources to make the national weather modification program
part of its basic mission needs to be designated; the absence of an
323
agency with this ability and role has been the reason that progress
has not been more rapid. The report went on to recommend that the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) be
assigned principal administrative responsibility for a national pro-
gram in weather modification. Several considerations were presented
in support of this recommendation.
The NAS report also suggested that it is unlikely that the current
ad hoc method of carrying out large field programs would be satis-
factory over the long term and that a national laboratory should be
assigned primary responsibility for carrying out large weather modifi-
cation experiments involving theoretical, laboratory, and field pro-
grams. This laboratory would have the advantage of being of sufficient
size to comprise the "critical mass" needed to mount a meaningful and
effective research and development program directed specifically to-
ward weather modification.
In addition, the NAS report recommended that the newly created
National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA)
undertake a major study of the public policy issues of weather modifi-
cation and of the Federal organization and legislation necessary.
While the report did not present a detailed budget for the various
program elements, it estimated that no less than $50 million per year
would be needed. This would have required at least a doubling of cur-
rent efforts at the time.
ANNUAL REPORTS TO THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS BY NACOA
The first annual report of the National Advisory Committee on
Oceans and Atmosphere in 1972 discusses the background and present
state-of-the-art in weather modification and recommended action it
believed desirable in : "legislation to define rights, responsibilities, and
a sense of purpose; research to hasten and extend our abilities to re-
duce risks; and. international agreement to promote peaceful uses of
weather modification and to eschew its hostile uses." This report also
found that a central focus was lacking in Federal weather modification
activities and suggested that NOAA might be the appropriate agency
for the lead role.
The second annual NACOA report (1973) repeated the basic
weather modification findings of the previous year, only this time high-
lighted them more clearly in the form of recommendations. The report
recommended that : "The many small programs in weather modifica-
tion now scattered widely through the Federal agencies be focused
and coordinated under NOAA's lead ; basic cloud physics and dynam-
ics be given higher priority; and that the legal, social, and economic
impact of weather modification be thoroughly examined and appro-
priate regulatory and licensing legislation be sought."
NACOA's third annual report again put forward the weather modi-
fication recommendations of the previous years, calling for designa-
tion of NOAA as lead agency, greater research emphasis on the phys-
ics of cloud formation and rainfall augmentation, and examination
of legislative and public policy issues including U.S. initiatives to
establish international agreement to insure that weather modification
efforts are devoted to mutually beneficial purposes.
324
The fourth annual NACOA report (1975) amplified the previous
weather modification recommendations and added a recommendation
that the Department of Agriculture, in conjunction with NOAA, de-
velop a crop assessment and planning system which will recognize the
national implications of simultaneous climatic variation upon agricul-
tural production worldwide.
In 1976 NACOA reported that the fragmented Federal effort in
weather modification placed too much emphasis on operations, with
insufficient attention to the basic research which is needed to make
weather modification a reliable operational tool. Finding that enough
studies have been conducted to permit a decision as to how to proceed,
NACOA recommended that action be taken now, by the executive
branch or by the Congress to give NOAA the responsibility for coor-
dinating and managing a coherent Federal program of weather modi-
fication research and experimentation.
Subsequent to passage of the National Weather Modification Policy
Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-490) the sixth annual NACOA report in 1977
did not include recommendations specific to weather modification.
However, the report stated that "NACOA has repeatedly urged a
coordinated Federal effort to support the basic research needed to
bring weather modification to the point of being an operational tool
resting on a sound technical base. * * * Major gaps remain — largely
because no one agency has the responsibility for identifying and sup-
porting those areas of basic study needed for further progress along
a broad front."
Public Law 94-490 directed the Secretary of Commerce to conduct a
1-year study and on the basis of this to recommend to the President
and to the Congress a national policy on weather modification, a Fed-
eral program to implement this policy, and organizational and legisla-
tive actions needed to put this program into effect. Because of adminis-
trative delays this study, being conducted by the 17-member weather
modification advisory board appointed in 1977, was not completed
within the year specified by the act, but will be completed during 1978.
NEED FOR A NATIONAL WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH PROGRAM
Because of the multiagency participation and the increased Federal
funding, in 1974 the General Accounting Office (GAO) undertook a
review of the administration of weather modification research. The
GAO report found that several administrative problems existed which
had been identified by previous studies during the past decade. These
problems were : (1) No central authority to direct Federal departments
efforts, (2) ineffective coordination, and (3) insufficient resources to
achieve timely, effective results. Although most previous studies pro-
posed the formation of a national program for weather modification,
previous recommendations that a single agency be responsible for
developing a national weather modification program had not been
implemented.
The GAO report also examined the ongoing national hail research
experiment which was planned as a coordinated effort with the Na-
tional Science Foundation as lead agency. GAO found "even though
the experiment was well planned, requiring extensive interagency
325
participation, in comparing planned efforts with actual efforts that,
for the most part, agencies could not and did not meet all their
obligations."
Consequently, the GAO report recommended that "the Office of
Management and Budget should, in cooperation with the Federal de-
partments and agencies involved in weather modification research : (1)
Develop a national program with goals, objectives, priorities, and
milestones, designating one of the agencies, which would have a major
program responsibility, to administer and maintain the national pro-
gram; (2) develop a plan to define and reassign, if appropriate, the
responsibilities of Federal departments and agencies providing sup-
port or conducting weather modification research; and (3) develop a
plan to allocate resources to the national program elements. The GAO
report went on to state that while proposed legislation to establish
a Department of Natural Resources would transfer three agencies'
weather modification activities to the proposed department, in GAO's
opinion, problems of administration and management would continue
because weather modification activities would still be fragmented.
THE FEDERAL ROLE IN WEATHER MODIFICATION
In 1975 the Domestic Council, Subcommittee on Climatic Change,
published a report containing findings and recommendations for the
Federal role in weather modification. The principal recommendation
of the report was that a policy should be adopted to develop, encour-
age, and maintain a comprehensive and coordinated national program
in weather modification research. The recommended Federal role was
divided into three areas ; research, operations, and regulation.
Among the recommendations for research, the report stated that the
Federal Government should recognize weather modification as having
significant potential for ameliorating important weather related prob-
lems and foster a broad-based effort to research and experimentation in
weather modification during the next decade. The Domestic Council
report offered two options for carrying out this Federal research role :
(1) Continued coordination and planning through ICAS, with each
agency following its mission-directed role, and (2) establishing a lead
agency. An appendix to the report stated that the Departments of
Commerce, State, and Transportation and the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration subscribe to the lead agency option and rec-
ommend that XOAA be assigned this lead agency responsibility.
Other research recommendations included: (1) Increased funding
for weather modification; (2) a more vigorous research program in
basic cloud physics; (3) greater emphasis on assessment, of socioeco-
nomic and environmental impacts of weather modification ; and, (4)
greater emphasis on developing improved methodologies to evaluate
the effects of weather modification.
These recommendations were based on findings that the present
strategy for Federal research in weather modification has largely been
mission orientated, which does not allow development of weather mod-
ification as a broad based national goal. Furthermore, although some
progress has been made over the past two decades, the scientific and
326
technological complexity of even modest weather modification experi-
ments requires greater staffing and funding than has generally been
available.
The report went on to note that few operational weather modifica-
tion techniques have been thoroughly proven, although several are suf-
ficiently close to the stage when they could become operational. Con-
sequently, the Domestic Council report made several recommendations
for the Federal versus State and private roles regarding weather mod-
ification operations. The report stated that the Federal Government
should reserve for itself responsibility for: (1) precipitation modifica-
tion related to multiple State water resources or Federal projects, (2)
weather modification over airports or related facilities, (3) mitigation
of large-scale drought, and (4) mitigation of hurricanes or extensive
storm systems.
The States and private sector should be encouraged to conduct
weather modification operations in all other areas. The Council recom-
mended that the private sector be utilized to conduct Federal weather
modification operations where feasible or desirable.
In the area of regulation, the Council report found that additional
Federal regulatory legislation was not needed at that time as present
reporting procedures were adequate. However, given the importance
and expected development of the field, continued examination of the
need for Federal regulation and international treaties to govern'
weather modification activities would be prudent. In response to that
finding, the Domestic Council report recommended that a formal pro-
cedure be established to periodically review regulatory needs. In addi-
tion, the report recommended that future U.S. domestic and foreign
weather modification activities should include prior assessment of the
potential international implications.
Trends and Analysis
In the studies and reports reviewed, a number of problems hindering
progress in weather modification have been identified and recom-
mendations have been made to resolve these problems. Two areas of
concern generally arose: (1) Federal organization or administration
of weather modification research and (2) specific program elements or
research needs. The recommendations are listed in table 1 in the form
of a matrix in which the recommendations are related to the reports
in which they are found. This format facilitates recognition of trends
such as recommendations made in early reports which are still being
made or, in some cases, may have been acted upon. Administrative
recommendations are grouped first.
327
TO >,
C C
4^2
<
gig
*i2
5e-
£X X XX X XX
XX
XX
XX
xx :x
xx ; ; ;x
xxxxxxxx
8x ;xxx
XXX IX
xxxxxxx ;xx :xx
xxxxxxx
xxxx
XX
XXX IXXXXXXX
XX
2 E
E3
co a>
, o c E
o-a o i=
= c
S> «J WOO
— .o o_ q co
* E
XX
•■1 f5
S = " E£
-o m £
•■= o S°
-C -Q C. CO CO
-, "J* C « CD
.UJ_.Eo
■2 m-c-i=
E.*> «
^ cm' CO*
u o
§.2.8°-
E - ° tr-o
mi h i
m o f ra ' m
•o <o m— >.E >
ni«»>,p O
X xxxxxx
xxxxxx
x xxxx :x
xxx
X xxx
S 5
o E
! °-S = g g-
: o co • °. tt 05
= *5-S»
•^3 <= oe co S
co := a> c
= c - 2 «
5 = »15 £?
a>-o to = — -
eo ®
> <« et.fS o
o w — 3
*- «tj-£ts
<=l a> <2 c
iri CO P>." 00 CD* O *-i CNJ co' 'S-' IT) CD r-I oo* a>" o <-I
xxx
SOW.
CO (O
|-= = s
O CO CD E
= « " ^
' S— co co .£
2 o £ £.2
' Xn -*= *^ "° co co >
[•■5 >>><2 ^>->>
!0M = 5o = = =
i u_ oo to o oo oo oo
■0OCT>CZ>*
o.5E-
c -£S o
oca
E
■O Q.'
CO «-o
■D CD CO
E !2 o co
E 2"."2
O 00 o '</>
o< 8 c
a>o c o
328
The most common administrative recommendation is to designate
a lead agency to provide overall coordination of a Federal weather
modification program. Other than the advisory committee report, of
1957, which recommended NSF for this role, the lead agency recom-
mended was NOAA or its predecessor ESSA. In the case of the Do-
mestic Council's report, a lead agency role was presented as one of two
options, the other being continued coordination through ICAS, but an
appendix supported by four agencies recommended that NOAA be
designated the lead agency. The recommendation for a lead agency was
frequently coupled with the recommendation that mission oriented
agencies support more fully the national weather modification efforts
as they relate to their particul ar mission.
In some cases recommendations of an administrative nature have
been acted upon or lead to a solution to the problem along other lines.
For example, the report of the Special Commission on Weather Modi-
fication in 1966 recommended that a standing committee on weather
modification be established in the National Academy of Sciences. While
a standing committee has not been established in NAS, panels on
weather and climate modification have been assembled as needed by
the Committee on Atmospheric Sciences. Additionally, in 1972
NACOA was established which, although not within the National
Academy, serves in the role of a standing advisory committee. Another
recommendation of the special commission was that the Office of
Science and Technology should establish a mechanism for the coordina-
tion of weather modification policies and programs. To some extent,
ICAS has responsibility in this area, but it lacks authority to initiate
action within any agency.
With regard to specific research recommendations or program ele-
ments, some reports are more general than others. For example, the
special commission report recommended that the Federal Government
conduct large field experiments without discussing these in detail.
Subsequent reports often detailed specific field projects.
Some perspective can be gained by comparing early reports to more
recent ones. Early reports identified the limitations on numerical
modeling imposed by the existing state-of-the-art in computer tech-
nology. While these limitations still exist to some extent, the significant
progress that has occurred in this field has served to reduce the ap-
parent magnitude of the problem. Early reports also identified re-
search and numerical modeling on isolated cumulus clouds as a primary
focus (the wisdom of dealing with simpler problems before attacking
more complex ones) , but later reports noted progress in this area and
pointed to the need for research and numerical modeling on a variety of
cloud systems. Early reports were also somewhat caught up in the gen-
eral enthusiasm for, and expectation of, being able to modify the
weather on an operational basis in the near future. Consequently, a
general feeling was that problems may arise in the absence of regula-
tory direction at the Federal level. However, as progress in weather
modification was not as rapid as expected (perhaps as a result of lower
levels of funding than expected or perhaps because of unanticipated
complexities with weather modification projects), it lias since become
apparent to many authorities that new regulatory measures are not
needed at this time, In this regard, the Domestic Council's report rec-
ommended periodic review to assess regulatory needs.
329
Almost invariably the reports pointed out that considerably greater
progress could be made if funding were increased. Although funding
for weather modification activities has increased over the years, most
recommendations for funding have been for considerably higher levels
than have actually been provided.2
2 See ch. 5 for funding data on Federal weather modification research programs. In par-
ticular, fig. 2 shows the course of Federal funding (planning budgets and actual expendi-
tures) from fiscal year 1966 to fiscal year 1978.
CHAPTER 7
STATE AND LOCAL ACTIVITIES IN WEATHER
MODIFICATION
( By Robert E. Morrison, Specialist in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research
Division, Congressional Research Service)
Overview of State Weather Modification Activities
INTRODUCTION
A majority of the States in the United States have some official
interest in weather modification. Twenty-nine States have some form
of law which relates to such activities, usually concerned with the vari-
ous facets of regulation or control of operations within the State and
sometimes pertaining to authorization for funding research and/or
operations at the State or local level. The statutes dealing with
weather modification for these 29 States are reproduced in appendix
D. Two other States, Maryland and Massachusetts, had also enacted
legislation on the subject ; however, the laws in these two States have
since been repealed. The general policy toward weather modification
in each State is usually reflected in the weather modification law of
that State ; the laws of some States tend to encourage development and
use of the technology, while others discourage such activities.
The current legal regime regulating weather modification has been
developed by the States rather than the Federal Government, except
in the areas of research support, commissioning studies, and requiring
reporting of activities. The various regulatory management functions
which the States perform are embodied in the collection of State laws
on weather modification. These functions include such activities as (1)
issuance, renewal, suspension, and revocation of licenses and permits;
(2) monitoring and collection of information on activities through re-
quirements to maintain records, the submission of periodic activity re-
ports, and the inspection of premises and equipment ; (3) funding and
managing of State or locally organized operational and/or research
programs; (4) evaluation and advisory services to locally organized
public and private operational programs within the State; and (5)
other miscellaneous administrative activities, including the organiza-
tion and operation of State agencies and boards which are charged
with carrying out the statutory responsibilities.
Both the kinds of weather modification functions performed and
the diversity of the functions performed by the several States can be
gleaned from table 1. in which are identified the chief elements of the
weather modification laws for the respective States having such laws.
(The information in the table was provided by Davis and reflects the
(331)
332
content of State laws in force at the end of 1975. ) 1 Hawaii's law merely
mentions atmospheric waters and is not included in the table.
In order to administer the various regulatory and managerial respon-
sibilities pertaining to weather modification within the States, an as-
sortment of institutional structures has been established. These include
State departments of water or natural resources, commissions, and
special governing or advisory boards. Often there is a combination of
two or more of these types of agencies or groups, separating the respon-
sibility functions of pure administration from those of appeals, permit-
ting, or advisory services. In the cases of particular State activities con-
tained in the latter part of this chapter, some examples of State institu-
tional structure for weather modification are discussed.2
TABLE 1.— ELEMENTS OF STATE WEATHER MODIFICATION LAWS IN FORCE AS OF THE END OF 1975'
Administra- Records Water
State tive Funding Licensing Permit and report rights Liability
Arizona X
California X X
Colorado X X
Connecticut X X
Florida X X
Idaho. X X
Illinois X
Iowa,.. X
Kansas X X
Louisiana X
Minnesota. X
Montana X X
Nebraska X X
Nevada X X
New Hampshire X
New Mexico X
New York X - X
North Dakota X X X X X X
Oklahoma... X X X X X
Licensing
Permit
and report rights
X
X
- X
X
X
X
X X
. X
X
X
X
. X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X -- -
X — — -
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Oregon X X X X
Pennsylvania X X X X X
South Dakota X X X X X
Texas X X X X X X X
Utah X X X X X X X
Washington X X X X X
We t Virg nia X - X X - X
Wisconsin X X X
Wyoming X X X X
1 From Davis. Testimony in hearings. House Committee on Science and Technology. Subcommittee on the Environment
and the Atmosphere. June 1976.
It is clear that the State weather modification laws and their at-
tendant administration are concerned especially in a variety of ways
with the regulation or control of activities within the State. This reg-
ulation often includes licensing and/or the granting of permits, and
it may also include monitoring, evaluation, and reporting of opera-
tions/The various means by which weather modification is controlled
are discussed in some detail in a section of the chapter of this report
on legal aspects.3 Specific laws of the States, found in full in appen-
dix D are also summarized in table 1 of that appendix, where they are
compared in terms of their being reasonably comprehensive, their pro-
viding for licensing only, or their containing some other miscellane-
ous provision.4
1 Davis. Ray J., testimony in : U.S. Congress. House of Representatives. Committee on
Soienrp and Technology, Snbcommittpe on the Environment and the Atmosphere. "Weather
Modification," hearings, 94th Cong., 2d sess., on H.R. 10039 and S. 3383, June 15-18, 1976.
Washington. D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office. 1976, pp. 250-252.
2 See p. 351 ff.
3 See ch. 11. p. 44!) ff.
* See p. 514 ff.
333
Since regulation cannot be effective without sufficient information
about ongoing activities, most States which do regulate weather modi-
fication provide authority which enables officials to inspect the prem-
ises of operators and to require them to maintain daily logs and report
on their activities regularly. Daily reporting is not required, however,
by any State, and copies of reports filed with the Department of Com-
merce are also accepted in some cases as satisfactory compliance with
reporting requirements. If properly analyzed by responsible State
agencies, the information contained in these reports should indicate
apppropriate changes or cessations to cloud-seeding operations, if any,
that should be made in the public interest.5
The extent of involvement in research and operations varies consid-
erably from State to State. Some States support research only, while
others fund and operate both operational and research programs. In
some cases funding only is provided to those localities, usually at the
county level, which have established operational programs. In other
States, counties and/or groups of individuals within local regions op-
erate programs funded entirely by local citizens, but with approval
and/or advisory services from State agencies. The recent 1976-77
drought conditions led some Western States to initiate emergency
cloud-seeding programs as one means of augmenting dwindling water
supplies. Among such measures taken on a short time basis are the
emergency operations in California, Kansas, and Washington; pro-
grams in these States are discussed briefly in the sections at the end of
this chapter dealing with the cases of individual States.
Within many of the States, particularly in the West, there is a broad
range of weather modification research activity. Usually this research
is performed by atmospheric and other scientists at the State univer-
sities or other State research agencies. Such research is frequently
funded through one of the Federal agencies with major weather modi-
fication research programs, such as the National Science Foundation
or the Bureau of Reclamation, or it may be supported at least in part
with State funds. A few States contribute funds to a Federal research
project which is conducted jointly with those States partly within
their boundaries.6
XORTH AMERICAN INTERSTATE WEATHER MODIFICATION COUNCIL
On J anuary 17, 1975, the Xorth American Interstate Weather Modi-
fication Council (XAIWMC) was organized to coordinate intrastate,
interstate, and possible international weather modification activities.
Its main purpose was to achieve and maintain local and State control of
such activities while attempting to attain a high degree on uniformity
in legislation and an effective mechanism for information exchange*7
The origin of the XAIWMC had its roots in a conference in June 1974,
in Sioux Falls, S. Dak., to which Gov. Richard K. Kneip of South Da-
kota invited the Governors of the United States.8 The program for this
Interstate Conference on Weather Modification was developed at Gov-
5 Davis, testimony before House Committee on Science and Technology. Subcommittee on
the Environment and the Atmosnhere. June 1976 hearings. 94th Cong.. 2d spss.. p 245
6 See discussion of the High Plains project (HIPLEX), under "Project Skywater," spon-
sored by the Bureau of Reclamation. c*i. 5. p. 258 ff.
7 Xorth American Interstate Weather Modification Council : Its Purposes and Activities
Las Cruces. N. Mex.. office of the XAIWMC. September 1976. Pub. Xo. 76-2. p. 1.
8 Conference on Weather Modification in the United States: Potential and Problems for
Interstate Action, State of South Dakota, Sioux Falls. S. Dak., June 10-12, 1974 248 pp
34-857 O - 79 - 24
334
ernor Kneip's direction by the South Dakota Weather Modification
Commission, which was then responsible for the operation of the state-
wide South Dakota weather modification program.9 Representatives
of 23 States and the Canadian Province of Alberta attended the con-
ference and reported on weather modification activities within their
States.
Recognizing the need for the prudent design and critical analysis
of all weather modification efforts. Governor Kneip stressed the fact
that interstate cooperation was "particularly needed in view of the
growing importance of agricultural production to the economy and
well-being of the people of all States and the tendency to develop indi-
vidual State weather modification programs." 10 At the end of the
conference representatives were selected from California, Xew Mexico,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and the Province
of Alberta to serve on an ad hoc committee which was to :
1. Investigate possible organizational needs ;
2. Plan a second conference on interstate weather modification
cooperation and coordination within 1 year; and
3. Study the Sioux Falls conference working committee reports
and develop suggestions into recommendations.11
The conference in June 1974 showed an expanding aAvareness of the
role of the States in weather modification activities, so that the main
mission of the ad hoc committee was to establish a forum for inter-
change and coordination of information of primary interest to State
officials in the operational or regulatory aspects of weather modifica-
tion.12 Meeting in October 1974, the ad hoc committee summarized the
following bases of concern :
(1) Substantial but fragmental local. State, and Federal activity
in deliberate and inadvertent weather modification.
(2) Weather modification effects do not respect internal or national
boundaries and no compacts or agreements exist regarding the effects.
(3) States require a measure of control over weather modification.
(4) No effective mechanism existed for interstate cooperation in
weather modification and the States did not have a coordinated ap-
proach for atmospheric resources decisionmaking.
(5) Minimal public involvement in whether modification decision-
making had been solicited in the past.
(6) Lack of uniformity existed in most State statutes.
(7) Little exchange of information among States had taken place.
(8) Weather modification decisionmaking must be responsive to
local. State, and interstate concerns.
(9) Weather modification activities in response to emergency
drought conditions would be most effective through an interstate
organization of State representatives.13
The ad hoc committee suggested that the overall object ives of the
proposed Interstate Council must be to serve as the focal point and
9 The South Dakota program lias since heen curtailed, owing to action of the State Legis-
lature. See discussion of the weather modification activities in South Dakota, p. 3.76.
10 Kneip. Richard P., letter of invitation to Governors of the United States to the Inter-
state Conference on Weather Modification. June 10-12. 1974. Sioux City. S. Dak.. Pierre,
S. Dak.. February 19. 1974.
11 Keyes, Conrad G.. Jr.. "North American Interstate Weather Modification Council : Need,
finals. I'urpose, and Activities," Water Resources Bulletin, vol. 13, No. 5, Octoher 1977,
p. 91 K.
™ Ibid.
13 Ibid.
335
clearinghouse for interstate weather modification activities and out-
lined the following specific objectives :
(1) Serve as the official spokesman for States' needs and views.
(2) Provide the organization through which funding of multi-State
assistance programs can be accomplished.
(3) Provide a forum for developing interstate agreements.
(■4) Develop and promote the adoption of compatible State regula-
tory activities.
(5) Develop and provide information for public use.
(6) Exchange information and provide assistance in environmental
and societal relations.14
The NAIWMC called its first business meeting in Denver, Colo.,
on January 17, 1975, following the second interstate conference on
weather modification.15 During this first meeting the Council adopted
bylaws, elected an executive committee and a board of directors, and
adopted several resolutions.16 Membership was made available to all
of the States of the United States, to the Government of Mexico, and
to all the Provinces of Canada. Each of these jurisdictions electing
to become a member was to affirm its decision through informing the
-Council of its support, appointment of a Council delegate and alter-
nate, and payment of dues. Affiliate membership was also made avail-
able to national agencies, political subdivisions within States or
Provinces, and professional organizations. Ten geographical areas
were formed as shown in table 2; areas 2 and 4 were Canada and
Mexico, respectively, while the other 8 areas were comprised of
regional groupings of the 50 U.S. States. Figure 1 shows the mem-
bership within these 10 areas as of October 1977, according the the
several membership categories. (At its November 1977 meeting, the
NAIWMC was reorganized into six districts — four in the United
States : one each in Canada and Mexico.)
Table 2. — Areas of the North American Interstate Weather Modification Council.
through October 1977 1
Area 1 Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana. Wyoming. Alaska.
Area 2 Canada.
Area 3 California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico,
Hawaii.
Area 4 Mexico.
Area 5 North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Minnesota. Iowa,
Wisconsin.
Area 6 Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas.
Area 7 Michigan. Illinois. Indiana. Ohio, Kentucky.
Area 8 Tennessee. North Carolina. South Carolina, Alabama, Georgia,
Florida. Mississippi.
Area 9 West Virginia. Virginia. Maryland. Delaware. New Jersey.
Pennsylvania.
Area 10 New York, Connecticut. Rhode Island, Massachusetts. Vermont.
New Hampshire, Maine.
xAt its annual meeting. November 3-4. 1977, the NAIWMC reorganized into six areas,
consisting of four in the United States (Western, Midwestern, Eastern, and Southeastern),
one in Canada (northern), and one in Mexico (southern).
14 Hud., p. 919.
15 North American Interstate Weather Modification Council, "Conference on Weather
Modification — a Usable Technology ; Its Potential Impact on the World Food Crisis," Den-
ver. Col.. Jan. 16-17. 1975. 150 pp.
16Keyes. Conrad G.. Jr.. "NAIWMC — Formation and Its Activities Through 1975," the
Journal of Weather Modification, vol. 8, No. 1, April 1976, pp. 158-159.
336
Figure 1. — Map showing the location of 1976 members and geographical distri-
bution of board of directors of the North American Interstate Weather Modi-
fication Council (from Keyes, 1977). (At its November 1977 annual meeting,
the NAIWMG reorganized into six areas — see footnote X, table 2, p. 835.)
The purpose of the NAIWMC, as stated in the adopted bylaws, is
divided into the following six categories :
Operations. — Tho Council shall assist governmental and private or-
ganizations in planning, design, implementation7, coordination, and
assessment of ongoing, temporary, and emergency Weather modifica-
tion operations which are planned with the intent or conducted with
the effect of causing international, national, interstate, or intrastate
consequences. The Council shall promote effective partnerships among
various agencies conducting weather modification operations, and
shall assist in integrating weather modification operations with water
resources development and other activities affected by weather modi-
fication activities.
337
Research and development. — The Council shall assist governmental
and private organizations in planning, design, implementation, co-
ordination, and assessment of weather modification research and de-
velopment. It shall promote common research concerning weather
modification activities and their environmental and societal conse-
quences. The Council shall provide a forum for the exchange of expe-
rience, data, and information about weather modification.
Public involvment. — The Council shall seek to provide informa-
tion for and engage the discussions with (a) public officials, (b) per-
sons involved in weather modification activities or who demonstrate
an interest in the effects of weather modification, and (c) the general
public. It shall serve as spokesman for the needs and views of the
member jurisdictions, and it shall develop public education programs.
Legislation. — The Council shall assist national governments, State
or Provincial governments, and groups of State or Provincial govern-
ments in preparation, review, and alternation of treaties, statutes,
compacts, and administrative rules and regulations. It shall seek to
obtain legislation which is responsive to local. State, interstate, na-
tional, and international concerns.
Regulations. — The Council shall assist regulatory agencies in main-
taining a high level of integrity and professional competency among
weather modifiers. It shall assist regulatory agencies in coordination
of their professional licensing and operational permit issuing func-
tions. It shall serve as a clearinghouse for environmental impact
statements relating to weather modification and for such other data
as will assist regulatory agencies.
Miscellaneous. — The Council shall serve such other purposes relat-
ing to the development, operation, and control of weather modifica-
tion as are consistent with those purposes expressly named in this
article. Such purposes shall be stated by resolution adopted at annual,
regular, or special meetings of the Council.17
Counting the January 1975 conference in Denver as the first meeting
of the Council, there have been a total of five NAIWMC conferences
through 1977. The second annual meeting was held in January 1976
at Kansas City, Mo.18 Two subsequent conferences were also held dur-
ing 1976, both in Denver, in August and December, respectively. The
first of these was a special meeting on legal uncertainties of weather
modification, and the December conference was the third annual meet-
ing of the Council.19 At both of these conferences, the Council held
business meetings. The 1977 regular meeting of the NAIWMC was
held November 3-4 in Canada at Calgary, Alberta. Proceedings of the
1977 conference will be published during 1978.
The annual meetings of the NAIWMC provide opportunities to ex-
change information on weather modification activities within the sev-
eral Council areas and to discuss and act upon resolutions and posi-
tion statements pertaining to matters of State, regional, national, and
international concern. Five resolutions were passed at the first meeting
in J anuary 1975, on the following subjects :
1. Federal and State legislative actions affecting weather modifica-
17 Keyes. "North American Interstate Weather Modification Council : Need, Goals, Pur-
pose, and Activities." 1977. pp. 919-920.
18 North American Interstate Weather Modification Council. "Conference on Weather
Modification. Todav and Tomorrow," January 15-16, 1976, Kansas City, Mo., publication
No. 76-1. NAIWMC. Las Cruces. N. Mex.. 119 pp.
19 North American Interstate Weather Modification Council, "Legal Uncertainties and
Legislation in Weather Modification ; Special and Third Annual Meeting of the Council,"
NAIWMC publication No. 77-1. September 1977. 172 pp.
338
tion: The unanimous decision of the NAIWMC was to inform all
Federal legislators of the existence of the Council and of the interest
and willingness of the organization to assist in the preparation and
review of existing and proposed Federal legislation. Further, since
some of the States have successful legislation in effect and have had
considerable experience in implementing their laws, the Council felt it
appropriate to offer the expertise of its members to assist other States
in preparation and development of weather modification legislation.
2. U.S. Forest Service control of weather modification activities:
Based upon the Organic Administration Act of 1897 (30 Stat. 34, 35,
36; 16 U.S.C. 475), regional supervisors of the Forest Service have
recently required land and water use permits for weather modification
projects possibly impacting national forest or national grassland
areas. The NAIWMC unanimously opposed this action of some Forest
Service personnel and strongly recommended that both Federal and
State officials and agencies address this problem, since its ramifications
could well reach beyond the question of weather modification regula-
tion and control.
3. Planning and operation of weather modification programs in
drought emergency situations: Because of existing and continuing
drought conditions over much of the Great Plains and the Corn Belt,
it was anticipated that Federal governments may implement weather
modification activities as a drought relief tool. It was noted, however,
that the feasibility of such relief was limited to decisionmaking totally
within Federal agencies, without consultation with officials of poten-
tially affected States. The NAIWMC recommended that State agen-
cies be consulted and included in the planning, developing, and imple-
menting of emergency weather modification programs during drought
situations.
4. Assistance in reviewing, assessing, and furthering the field of
weather modification by the Weather Modification Association : In this
resolution the NAIWMC requested that the Weather Modification As-
sociation consider supporting the concept of the Council and agree to
provide a ready and willing reservoir of talent and expertise to the
Council and/or the various States.20
5. Emergency drought assistance bill, S. 4028, 93d Congress: The
NAIWMC strongly supported the concept of utilizing weather modi-
fication as proposed in the bill, but further suggested that these con-
cepts be expanded to specifically include a strong organizational struc-
ture at the State level, advanced technical planning, the mechanisms
for quick-reacting financial response, and a strong local input to sub-
sequent field operations. The Council furthermore recommended that
such a bill ought to specify a mechanism for recognizing and antici-
pating the conditions under which its provisions would come to play
so that relief could be given before a drought becomes advanced and
critical.21
At the January 1070 meeting, the Council adopted position state-
ments on bills then before the 94th Congress of the United States. The
2,) The purposes and activities of the Weather Modification Association are discussed un-
der Private Activities in eh. 8. p. •"'•!•<».
21 Keyes. "NAIWMC — Formation and Its Activities Through 1975," 1976, pp. 160-162.
339
first of three bills introduced by Senator Henry Bellmon, S. 2705, to
establish a National Weather Modification Commission, was strongly
supported by the Council, which pledged to work with such a com-
mission if established. No position was adopted, however, on the other
two "Bellmon bills," and an opposing position was taken on H.R.
10039 (the "Evans bill'').22
The NAIWMC has established close coordination with the Council
of State governments and the National Conference of State Legisla-
tures, recommending that input be made on weather modification at
future meetings of both groups. Suggested issues to be discussed at
such meetings include interstate arrangements for research, operations,
and evaluation; provision of institutional framework for handling
funding and tradeoffs between various societal segments; and provi-
sion of better information to State decisionmakers in both the execu-
tive and legislative branches.23 In January 1976 the Council adopted
a resolution to support the draft of the proposed model law on weather
modification, prepared by Prof. Ray Davis of the University of Ari-
zona. Copies of this draft law have been provided to the Model Law
Committee of the Council of State Governments. The NAIWMC also
supported the concept of and sponsored four participants to the con-
ference on "Legal and Scientific Uncertainties of Weather Modifica-
tion," conducted by the American Bar Foundation and the American
Association for the Advancement of Science at Duke University on
March 12-13, 1976. State governments have requested and received
testimony from members of the Council ; and, in particular, such testi-
mony was provided at meetings of the Minnesota Task Force on
Weather Modification and the Minnesota State Senate prior to adop-
tion of the new Minnesota weather modification statute.124
The Council has also participated with Federal agencies in planning
future weather modification projects affecting various regions of the
country. A cooperative planning session on the Bureau of Reclama-
tion's proposed Colorado River weather modification demonstration
program was sponsored by the NAIWMC in Denver in August 1976.
Invited to the session were the seven States on the Colorado River
Basin, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Upper Colorado River Com-
mission, and State commissions from the lower river basin. The Coun-
cil has also been requested by the Advanced Planning Group on
NOAA's Weather Modification Project Office in Boulder to provide
input to planning of future weather modification research projects.-5
In order to learn about the State weather modification activities,
laws, institutional structure, research recommendations, and potential
interest in participation on the Council, the NAIWMC circulated a
number of questionnaires among the officials and agencies of State
governments during 1976 and 1977. Information from these surveys
has been summarized in tabulated form and conclusions formulated
22 See ch. 5. p. 20H. for a synopsis of tbe<-e bills introduced in +he 94th Congress.
23 Keves. 'North American Interstate Weather Modification Council: Need, Goals, Pur-
pose, and Activities," 1977, p. 922.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid.
340
by the executive secretary of the Council. This information is presented
elsewhere in this report in discussions of State weather modification
activities 2G and recommended research activities for Federal agencies.27
Questionnaires and regional meetings of the NAIWMC have de-
fined potential users of weather modification technology throughout
the North American Continent. Views on legislation have also been
presented in testimony at 1976 weather modification hearings in both
Houses of the U.S. Congress and before Appropriation Committees in
19TT. Testimony was also provided by the NAIWMC to the U.S.
Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board at
its fifth meeting in October 1977 in Champaign, 111. Recommendation
by the States, presented through the Council in such testimony, has
generally supported a Federal law which would include establishment
of a national weather modification policy in research and development,
a coordinated effort of Federal activities (possibly by regions or major
water basins) , and a common licensing and permit system administered
by the States.28
Results of a survey of State interests in weather modification, con-
ducted by the NAIWMC, are included in the following section.
SURVEY AND SUMMARY OF STATE INTERESTS AND ACTIVITIES IN WEATHER
MODIFICATION
During 1977, the North American Interstate Weather Modification
Council (NAIWMC) surveyed weather modification interests in all
50 States, posing the following questions to appropriate State agencies
or officials :
1. Which organizations in your State have the mission of licensing,
monitoring, controlling, or operating weather modification activities ?
2. Does your State presently support weather modification pro-
grams ?
3. What weather modification regulation does your State have?
4. What positions on weather modification does your State have ? 29
The responses received in reply to the NAIWMC questionnaire have
since been revised and updated. The data in table 3 were obtained
from officials in the respective States and have been updated through
January 1978.30 In the table the States are arranged according to the
10 areas to which they had been assigned by the NAIWMC prior to
the reorganization into six areas at the November 1977 annual meet-
ing.31 (Areas 2 and 4 were comprised of the Canadian Provinces and
the Mexican States, respectively, and are not included in the results of
the survey.)
26 See p. :i41 in this chapter.
2" See ch. 3, p. 138.
28 Keyes, Conrad G., Jr., "Federal Research iseeds and New Law Requirements in Weather
Modification : the NAIWMC Viewpoint," testimony before the U.S. Department of Commerce
Weather Modification Advisory Board, Champaign, in.. Oct. 14. 1977.
-"' Keyes, "North American Interstate Weather Modification Council : Need, Goals, Pur-
pose, arid Activities," 1077. p. 924. (In addition to these four questions, the States were also
queried about their interests and potential participation in the Council ; since these latter
questions and responses to them are not germane to the general survey of State activities,
they are not included in the list aliove or in the assemblage of responses in table 3.)
Keyes. Conrad (J.. Jr.. Private communication, January 1!)7S.
ni See preceding section, p. .°>.'W, for a discussion of the North American Interstate Weather
Modification Council.
341
5 §
"co ce
s < ^
; £ a> <u
1 Zr, = 1=
• <13 O O
inoi □
O CO
_ co o
c: o. o.
o p a.
■= o =
o o
s|.l
S o u
CK0-<
II
■DO
o
Mi; o
3 3 01 o
u-oo z:
E 2
5
' E ro^ he _
■K So© g
ca o ■=
• a. «c«
io 512 1
c co c °
1 qo a> a. o> ^
c - E^ E >-
m to a) ra £
o a> ° a> ™ a> <u
o ^
S °
3 =
O TO
o |
CM o
5
■25
M
o E
a) co
« g-
So
5 S
O 03
ec —
= ^•2:5
c o ro ° — ' ^
E<§
03 S— 1"D =• Z3
C BlO. C BO at
o 03— 3 a> Q3
a> C 03 «3
E S'Eo
1 ■§ •
CO o ,
iservatioi
IS.
id Cloud
sion.
esources.
)ervisors.
:ulture. .
culture.,
in Board.
8 Iff?
— o £ = -2
O K H "
03 c o >
rdof Su|
: of Agrii
: of Agri
dificatic
irtmenl
atural F
ther Cc
cation I
iion of
ity Boa
irtmenl
irtmenl
:her Mc
Dep;
N;
Wea
ifi
Divi;
rjO-Q-CO
o a> as
o<2'-1 v
O CO
2=5
E ^
CO c
Q. =
<u co_r-
<
a;
c co -r;
^E =
342
O 3
o: o M
Q < *
M Z U
< w lc
<i> a> o
o o a.
;§ 2
E""=>
r- O
! o 5 42
oo zco>
<d a> a>
c = c 5
o o o °
a> oj -J
c era.
o o —
01 u u
C 03 03
o a. a.
2ZOO
CO
e
"2 1
co a.
, >
a
•~.2 •
CO ^ CO
CO CO CO > CO c
•- C O cZ
I I
CO CO CO
c cc c
o o o
CO CO CO CO
cc c c c
o o o o
co co r
o O.
CO CO CO
£= C C
o o o
CO CO CO CO
c c c c
o o o o
_ E
<= ='E
o o-
oci"£ E
Vi — s
E " oo
E-2
_ co co a, co _
cr cr cccc
o o co o o o o
zzo 2 z z: 2:
L2 2 <«
1. CO <o co
«^3C
• — O o CO
5ZV)r-
CO CO
o o
CO CO CO
O CO CO o o
oo
' CO
I CO
IT3
i O
O
c_>
nn.
Ms.
<
CC
-o
CO*
_Co
03
co
CO
a.
CO
nn
<
Q-E
COCO
-OCSI
CO CO
11
C CO
o o -
3 oe <✓> co c
•a co co co o
lu or ce cc z
E ™
.5 oo
CO CO cr
CO 03 03 CO CO CO CO
c c c c c c c
o o o o o o o
co j2 =
^-JooS
CC C> c
CO o CZ CO 03 o o
oz<o:uzz
03 03 03 03 03 03 03
cr e c cr cr cr c
o o o o o o o
o o o o £ o o
Jcijcccc
o> 0 03 0 0 0 0
cc lu
>5 < I
:•> 03
co <D • —
- 03
>5
e^t-^j
7j CO O— C
CO CC >- Q) O
t= - « s S o !:
o (O CO CO CO JZ CO
oSSzzoo
343
In his analysis of the responses to the NATVVMC questionnaire
Keyes has made the following observations : 32
h Few States have weather modification regulation outside a de-
partment of water or natural resources.
2. Only a few States have direct involvement in on-going weather
modification programs.
3. Several States support the concept of funding further research
in weather modification.
4. Twenty-nine States have a law that deals directly or indirectly
with weather modification.
5. Very few States have positions concerning weather modification
programs.
STATE CONTACTS FOR INFORMATION ON WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES
The diversity of weather modification activities within the States
and the frequent changes in State laws and procedures for executing
the provisions of the laws point to the need for obtaining current
information on a given State through responsible State officials. Also,
further information on the statute's official activities, and policy to-
ward weather modification in the several States can be obtained
through contacting appropriate individuals within the governmental
structure of each State. A list of such persons, found in appendix E,
has been assembled from names and addresses of persons within the
States, collected by the Xorth American Interstate Weather Modifica-
tion Council (NAIWMC), who have some interest and/or respon-
sibility for weather modification.33
The list in appendix E is intended to provide a single point of
contact within each State and is believed to be current as of January
1978. The individuals listed are cognizant of official State activities
and current State laws; however, they can also serve as starting points
within each State, leading to subsequent contacts for additional in-
formation for which they may not have direct responsibility. Such
information might relate to local operations and activities of citizens
groups, commercial operators incorporated and based within the State
(whose sphere of operations includes other States and countries),
university research projects, and Federal research projects conducted
within the State.
The list of individuals in appendix E is complete in that all 50
States are represented, including those without weather modification
laws. In the latter cases, the names or offices appearing are those quali-
fied to respond to queries on private or local activities within the
State or on current and future State interest on the subject. The entries
in the list are alphabetically ordered according to State name.
NONFEDERAL U.S. WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES
The mechanism for reporting of U.S. weather modification activities
to the Secretary of Commerce through the National Oceanic and At-
mospheric Administration (XOAA). as required by Public Law 92-
205 and its amendments, has been discussed under activities of the
executive branch of the Federal Government.34 In accordance with the
32 Keves. "North American Interstate Weather Modification Council : Need, Goals. Pur-
pose, and Activities." 1977. pp. 924-925.
33 Keyes, Conrad G., Jr. (executive secretary of the North American Interstate Weather
Modification Council), private communication.
34 See chapter 5, p. 232.
344
requirement for publishing summary reports on these activities "from
time to time,'' XOAA has prepared four such summary reports, the
last of which covers projects which were actively in progress at some
time during calendar year 1975. 35 (A summary report incorporating
similar activities for calendar years 1976 and 1977 is in preparation by
NOAA.) For convenience, the NOAA summary reports include data
on Federal research projects as well as all U.S. non-Federal projects
although the law requires only reporting of the latter category of
activities.
Analysis of calendar year 1975 projects
The total listing of both non-Federal and Federal U.S. weather
modification projects conducted during 1975 and appearing in the
latest XOAA summary report36 appeal's in appendix G. Of the 85
projects reported in 1975, 12 were completed early in the year, but 12
similar projects were reinstated later the same year at the same loca-
tions. Furthermore, two U.S. Air Force operational projects in Alaska
were replaced during the same year by a single project. Of the 72 non-
duplicative projects in as many separate locations, 58 were nonfed-
erally sponsored and the Federal Government sponsored 14. This
division and the breakdown of the 72 projects by numbers in various
categories of initiation, completion, and continuation during 1975 are
shown in table 4. Tables 5 and 6 give numbers of projects carried out
according to various types of operators and according to kinds of
sponsors, respectively. Some activities, such as fog dispersal projects
at airports, have multiple sponsors, as several airlines, for example,
may enter into joint funding arrangements. Of the 80 distinct sponsors
in table 6, at least 13 are public at the State and local level if the four
categories — municipal districts. States, cities, and counties — are com-
bined. At least 23 non-Federal public projects during 1975 can be
counted, however, from the listing in appendix G, since some of the
sponsors enumerated in table 6 funded more than one project ; some of
the sponsors counted in the category of "airlines/airports" were also
public agencies.
The purposes for the reported activities are identified, with the cor-
responding numbers of each, in table 7. The total in this table (88) is
larger than the number of nonduplicative projects (72) because some
projects were conducted for two purposes.37
Table 4. — Active, nonduplicative weather modification projects in the United States
in calendar year 1975 {from Charak, 1976)
Non-Federal projects 58
Federally sponsored projects 14
Projects active on Jan. 1, 1975 35
Projects active on Dec. 31, 1975 2fi
Projects active on Jan. 1 and Dec. 31, 1975 10
Projects initiated in calendar year 1975 37
Projects completed in calendar year 1975 46
35 Charak. Mason T.. "Wenther Modification Activity Reports: Calendar Year 197.V Na-
tional Oceanic and Atmosnheric Administration, Office of Environmental Monitoring and
Prediction. Rockville, Md.. June 197G. 64 pp.
Mlhid.. pp. 19-35.
37 Ibid., pp. 3-7.
345
TABLE 5.— OPERATORS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES (FROM CHARAK, 1976)
Type Operators
Commercial weather modifiers 15
Universities 5
Federal 5
Municipal districts 5
Community associations 2
Power companies 1
Individuals 2
Total 35
Activities
72
TABLE 6.— SPONSORS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES (FROM CHARAK, 1976)
Type
Community associations.
Federal
Airlines/airports
Municipal districts
States
Power companies
Private sector
Cities
Counties
Total
Sponsors
Activities
TABLE 7.— PURPOSE AND SPONSORSHIP OF WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES (FROM CHARAK, 1976)
Sponsors
Snow
Precipita-
tion
Disperse fog
Cold
Warm
Decrease
hail
Research
Community associations 5
Airlines/airports
Federal agencies
Municipal districts 4 3
States 6
Power companies 2
Private sector .... 1
Cities
Counties 1
Total 17 5
16 6
9 1
2 12
2 1
1 6 1
2
1 2
1 1 1
1
22 13 2 14 1 5
Table 8 summarizes weather modification statistics by State and by
total target area covered for 1975. Seventy-five activities in 25 States
are shown, duplications appearing over the 72 basic project locations
because three projects extended into adjoining States — from Michigan
into Indiana, from Delaware into Maryland, and from California into
Nevada. The geographical distribution of all reported projects is shown
in figure 2. Numbers on the map indicate the order in which initial
project reports were received by XOAA. missing numbers correspond-
ing to projects reported in earlier years but now terminated. An ;'Fr
adjacent to a number indicates a federally sponsored project. 3S
Eighty percent of U.S. weather modification projects were carried
out west of Kansas City during 1975, with the largest projects in Cali-
fornia, Oklahoma. South Dakota, and Colorado, in that order of size.
South Dakota, Utah. North Dakota. Kansas, and California, in order,
had the largest area coverage from these projects. In the East. Michi-
38 Ibid., pp. 8-10.
346
gan led in the number of projects, while Florida had the most area cov-
ered. The total target area comprised about 5 percent of the total area
of the United States, Federal activities accounting for about 7 percent
and commercial operators for 93 percent of this area. Sixty-five percent
of the area of South Dakota was specified as target area, while in Utah.
Delaware, and North Dakota corresponding percentages were 49, 36,
and 26, respectively.39
TABLE 8.— LOCATION AND SIZE OF TARGET AREAS (FROM CHARAK, 1976)
Target area
Location Activities (square miles)
Alaska 2 51
California 11 5,183
Colorado 6 3,315
Delaware.... 1 750
Florida 2 4,878
Idaho 1 198
Illinois 1 2
Indiana 1 204
Iowa 2 4
Kansas 1 9,000
Maryland 1 750
Michigan 6 3,507
Montana 1 5
Nebraska 1 2
Nevada 2 755
New Hampshire 1 4
North Dakota 5 18,629
Oklahoma. 9 7,885
Oregon 3 7,841
Pennsylvania 1 200
South Dakota .... 7 50,085
Texas 3 7,200
Utah.. 3 41,510
Washington 3 56
Wyoming.. 1 180
Total 75 163,194
: i«_
138 139
181
137 136 135
126 / 183F 75F
IT? 175
Tll8 \
Cl 171 '<
^21? 177f\
_ Nuabera Indicate
approximate project location.
An " 7" ahova Federally
aponeorad activity. Appendix
A con talc a a 11a t of theae
numbered projecta.
FlOUEE 2. Federal and non-Federal weather modification activities in the United
Slates, calendar year 1975. (From Charak, 1J)7(>. )
•» Ibid., p. 10.
347
Preliminary analysis of projects for calendar years 1976-77
Prior to publication of the next XOAA summary of U.S. weather
modification projects, to be completed during 1978, Charak has com-
pleted a preliminary analysis of reported projects for the calendar
years 1976-77.40 Table 9 provides information on numbers of projects,
operators, and sponsors for the 2 years. An increase of 44 percent in
total activities is seen from 1976 to 1977, although Federal projects de-
creased 33 percent while non-Federal ones increased 60 percent. The
number of non-Federal weather modifiers remained constant for the 2
years ; however, there was an approximate 40-percent increase in the
number of community sponsoring groups from 1976 to 1977. Further
analysis of the operators in 1977 shows that six commercial firms con-
ducted 60 percent of the activities, and three of these companies op-
erated 50 percent of the projects. The increase in projects in 1977 re-
flects the efforts to combat or forestall drought conditions in the
United States on the part of various States, local farm groups, and
municipal water districts. Charak feels that this increase may also
indicate that the belief in the potential of cloud seeding for precipita-
tion enhancement is shared by more and more governmental officials
and other people affected by water shortages.41
TABLE 9.— OPERATORS AND SPONSORS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES IN THE UNITED STATES
(FROM CHARAK, 1978)
Calendar year—
1976 1977
Total activities/locations 61 88
Non-Federal.. 52 82
Federal 9 6
Operators 31 29
Federal . 4 2
Non-Federal 27 27
Commercial '. 16 16
Water districts... 7 7
Universities 2 2
Community associations . 1 1
Utilities... 1 1
Sponsors 59 68
Community associations... 18 25
Airlines 10 10
Municipal districts 10 12
Federal organizations . 6 3
States 5 6
Utilities 4 3
Private 5 6
Cities 1 3
Table 10 shows the distribution of reported activities by State and
by total target area size within the States for the 2 years. California
led in the number of activities for both years and also had the largest
target area increase from 1976 to 1977. However, the total target area
in Utah in 1977 was the largest for any State for the 2 years. Because
some projects crossed State boundaries, the total numbers in table 10
exceed the numbers in table 9. The purposes and the seeding agents for
40 Charak. Mason T.. "Preliminary Analysis of Reported Weather Modification Activities
in the United States for Calendar Year 1976-77." Submitted for publication in The Journal
of Weather Modification, 197S.
11 Ibid.
348
the various weather modification activities are given in table 11. In-
crease of precipitation continues to be the major purpose of the proj-
ects. The number of projects directed to hail suppression was reduced
by 50 percent over the previous year in 1977, and in all hail projects
there was the additional intended goal of increasing precipitation.
The most used seeding agent continues to be silver iodide, although
there is increased use of dry ice for precipitation enhancement as well
as for cold fog dispersal.42
TABLE 10.— ACTIVITIES AND SIZE OF TARGET AREAS, BY STATE (FROM CHARAK, 1978)
Calendar year 1976
Area
(square
Activities miles)
Calendar year 1977
Area
(square
Activities miles)
Alaska 2 3 3 7
California 11 11,993 20 59,403
Colorado 3 2,915 6 31,300
Delaware ■. 1 1,000 0 0
Florida 1 4,800 0 0
Georgia 0 0 3 9,000
Idaho 1 8,600 1 600
Illinois 2 2,502 3 3,700
Iowa 2 4 1 3,600
Kansas.... . 1 9,000 1 10,400
Louisiana 0 0 2 1,350
Maryland 1 1,100 0 0
Michigan 1 530 3 7,524
Minnesota 2 15,381 1 240
Montana 2 20,005 2 20,005
Nebraska 12 0 0
Nevada 1 5 7 16,326
New Hampshire 14 1 4
North Dakota. 4 23,068 3 16,288
Oklahoma 7 6,948 2 719
Oregon _____ 2 7,821 3 836
South D'akota 3 11,821 1 2,500
Texas 5 11,226 5 11,826
Utah 4 59,410 9 92,135
Washington 3 56 10 25,379
Wisconsin 0 0 1 1,100
Wyoming 2 196 4 1,446
63 198,390 92 315,689
TABLE 11.— WEATHER MODIFICATION PURPOSE AND AGENT (FROM CHARAK, 1978)
Calendar year—
1976 1977
Purpose:
To increase precipitation.
To decrease hail
To disperse fog...
For research
Agent:
Silver iodide.
Dry ice
Liquid propane
Polyelectrolyte.
Water spray
41
76
12
6
11
8
5
4
45
74
11
17
2
4
2
1
2
0
General Discussion of Local Weather Modification Policy
and Activities
In most instances, the principal beneficiaries of weather modifica-
tion are the local or regional users who include agricultural invests,
v Ibid.
349
weather-relsrted industries, municipalities, airports, utilities, and ordi-
nary citizens — those individuals and groups whose economic well-being
and whose lives and property are subject directly to adverse conse-
quences of insufficient water supplies or the extreme effects of severe
weather. It is at the local level where the need to engage in weather
modification is most keenly perceived. Most evident at this same level
are the interests of those who may be affected negatively by the real or
perceived results of weather modification. It follows that both the
greatest support and the strongest opposition to weather modification
projects are focused at the local level, where expressions of differing
positions are most vocal.
The popularity of a particular weather modification project and
the degree of controversy surrounding a project are frequently deter-
mined in large measure by the extent to which local citizens and
organizations have a voice in whether a project shall be conducted,
how it can be controlled aaid curtailed if necessary, and how it shall
be funded. When, as in some States, counties or municipalities are
authorized to raise and expend tax moneys to support weather modifi-
cation, the importance of this voice becomes even more evident. At
the local level, the decision to implement or withdraw from a project
can be most often made with minimum social stress. Table 12 sum-
marizes the results of a study by Haas, in which citizens in Colorado
and South Dakota were polled on their sentiments on the level of gov-
ernment or other groups by which decisions ought to be and likely will
be made on local cloud-seeding projects.43 More than half of the re-
spondents in the survey who expressed an opinion felt that local resi-
dents or local government officials should make such decisions, and
the greatest plurality held that the decision should be solely that of
local residents.
TABLE 12.— CITIZEN VIEWS OF WHO SHOULD AND WHO WILL MAKE THE DECISION REGARDING A LOCAL CLOUD-
SEEDING PROJECT (PRIOR TO START OF LOCAL PROGRAM) (FROM HAAS, 1974)
[In percent)
Colorado
(N = 168)
South Dakota
(N = 182)
Response
Should
Will
Should
Will
Local residents
58
16
36
7
Local government
4
2
7
13
County and State government
0)
0)
9
15
State government
8
14
7
21
State and Federal Government
7
15
6
8
Federal Government
7
18
1
8
Scientists
7
13
7
1
Other, including combinations2
5
8
24
7
Don't know
4
14
3
20
1 Not included in Colorado survey.
2 Includes 6 percent who said, "farmers and ranchers" without specifying area of residence.
Counties and other local governmental jurisdictions exercise the
greatest control over weather modification through their willingness
or reluctance to support with tax dollars either the projects initiated
by States or by districts within the States. In their appraisal of the
43Hass. J. Eugene, "Sociological Aspects of Weather Modification," in Wilmot N. Hess
(editor). "Weather and Climate Modification," New York. Wiley, 1974, p. 805.
34-857 O - 79 - 25
350
relevance which local government policy at various levels has to
weather modification, Lambright and Dorsey conclude that:
The jurisdictional powers of local government bear no direct, and little indi-
rect, relationship to weather modifications activities. Only in an area where tax
levies are authorized for the support of weather modification (e.g., a county) can
the local government exercise "control" (positive or negative) over weather
modification by its willingness, or reluctance, to sponsor the activity. Where
multicounty. cooperative areas are involved, the actions of several counties can
provide a substantial substate base of support for weather modification within
a State. Acting under State law. these substate regions can become the principal
structure for day-to-day decisions governing the technology.44 45
In both North and South Dakota, counties have been given author-
ity by the State legislatures to levy taxes for the specific purpose of
supporting local weather modification projects. In North Dakota,
county weather modification authorities are created to provide user
control over projects and to stabilize local social problems arising from
controversies over the projects. A Xorth Dakota statute provision al-
lows county residents to withdraw from a joint State-county project
and to abolish a county authority through circulation of petitions or
countywide elections.
A California statute, enacted in 1955 and providing authority to
various local governmental units to support and conduct weather mod-
ification operations, states that :
Any county, city, city and county, district, authority or other public corporation
or agency which has the power to produce, conserve, control or supply water for
beneficial purposes shall have the power to engage in practices designed to pro-
duce, induce, increase or control rainfall or other precipitation for the general
benefit of the territory within it.46
Regulation of weather modification in California is essentially a
function of the State and not local governments. This division of
authority follows from the fundamental role of the State to allocate
water, even though the California constitution gives authority to
counties and cities to enact regulatory measures so long as they do not
conflict with the general laws. On the other hand, special districts are
not given this authority nor can the legislature delegate such authority
to these districts. Since the State has already enacted minimal weather
modification regulations, local regulatory power is somewhat limited
as it may not conflict with the State provisions.47
In other States local regulation of weather modification is more in
evidence, both through formal and informal arrangements. For ex-
ample, in Pennsylvania, where the State law does permit weather
modification projects under very strict regulations, some townships in
the south-central part of the State have passed ordinances prohibiting
all such activities.48
" Lambright, W. Henry and Thomas A. Dorsey, "An Issue Paper: Some Notes on Inter-
governmental Relations in a National Weather Modification Policy," background paper pre-
pared for the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board. Febru-
ary 1977, pp. 9-10.
45 In the context of this quotation, "local" refers to governments at the subcounty level :
whereas the term "local" means any jurisdiction. Including counties, at the substate level
elsewhere throughout tins chapter.
"l California Government Code. sec. 53063. (The entire body of California State law per-
taining to weather modifications is reproduced in app. I), p. old).
17 Sato. Sbo, - The Role of Local Governmental Units in Weather Modification: Califor-
nia." in Howard .1. Taubenfeld (editor). "Controlling the Weather: a Study of Law and
Regulatory Processes, ' New York, Dune lien, 1970, pp. 229-2:u and pp. 242-24S.
8 In Pennsylvania, townships are local administrative units within counties, mosth rural
in complexion, which, along with cities and boroughs, make up the total area of each
county.
351
In Colorado, the Department of Natural Resources has sole author-
ity to grant or revoke a permit. Nevertheless, strongly negative senti-
ments expressed in a preference vote in five counties of the San Luis
Valley were instrumental in the decision of the department to deny a
summer cloud-seeding permit in 1973. Winter cloud seeding has been
initiated in the region subsequently and continues only with the un-
official yet very effective approval and local control of a citizens group.
This group was formed as the result of an agreement by, and includes
members from, both local proponents and opponents of cloud seeding,
and the group holds veto power to suspend operations by majority
vote.
Local projects have typically been sponsored by groups of farmers
or ranchers, public utility companies, air lines and airports, water
districts, and municipalities. Often they have been sponsored and/or
controlled at the county, city or special district level and have been
funded at least in part through local tax levies, depending on the
authorities granted these jurisdictions in particular States. In some
States, counties and States have jointly funded local projects in ac-
cordance with some cost-sharing formula established by statute or
agreed upon between the State and local jurisdictions.
Tables 6 and 9 in an earlier section of this chapter 49 summarize
information on sponsors of U.S. weather modification projects for
1975 through 1977. From these data the numbers of local public spon-
sors are seen to be 33, 29, and 38, respectfully, for calendar years 1975,
1976, and 1977, when the sponsor categories of community associations,
municipal districts, cities, and counties are combined. "State" projects
usually include joint efforts with counties or groups of counties within
the States, so that the sponsors so identified as States in the tables
could be further broken down in some cases into additional local
sponsors, increasing the previous totals. The category "community
associations" consists of groups of local citizens within a county or
group of counties, supported by local taxes and/or voluntary contribu-
tions.
Specific examples of local projects and sponsors are included in
discussions of weather modification activities within particular States
in the latter part of this chapter. In particular, table 13, listing indi-
vidual projects for the water year 1977 (October 1, 1976 through
September 30, 1977) in California shows the variety of sponsors,
public and private, found in that State, which has both the greatest
number of sponsors and projects in the country. Tables 16 and 17
provide similar information for calendar years 1975 and 1976 for
projects in the three- State area of North and South Dakota and Min-
nesota in the upper Middle West.
Weather Modification Activities in Particular States
Since each of the States is somewhat different from the others in the
extent and the diversity of involvement in weather modification, it is
difficult to give a full account of activities by the several States. The
list of individuals in the respective States, referred to in a previous
section and found in appendix E, can be used to acquire detailed, cur-
See pp. 345 and 347.
352
rent information on activities within a particular State. In addition,
however, in order to provide further insight into the kinds of organi-
zational structures, regulatory activities, and operational and research
programs within States, some case examples of particular States are
discussed in the following sections. The cases were selected on the basis
of both availability of information and the variety of State activities.
The States discussed are California, Illinois, Kansas, North Dakota.
South Dakota, Utah, and Washington.
CALIFORNIA
State weather modification law and regulations
The California statute both encourages the development of weather
modification technology and recognizes the need to regulate its
practice. Chapter four of the State water code, entitled "Regulation of
Rain-making and Rain-prevention," passed in 1953, states that:
The public interest, health, safety, welfare, and necessity require that scientific
experimentation in the field of artificial nucleation, and that scientific efforts to
develop, increase, and regulate natural precipitation be encouraged, and that
means be provided for the regulation and control of interference by artificial
means with natural precipitation of rain, snow, moisture, or water in any form
contained in the atmosphere, within the State, in order to develop, conserve, and
protect the natural water resources of the State and to safeguard life and prop-
erty.50
The California Department of Water Resources is the agency re-
sponsible for carrying out the provisions of the water code related to
weather modification. The law itself expresses in some detail the means
by which the regulations are to be administered. Licenses are required
and must be obtained from the department of water resources, each
application requiring specific information on the education, experience,
and other qualifications of the individual or persons in control of and
charged with the operations. Data required with each application
includes :
The previous education, experience, and qualifications of the
applicant, or, if the applicant is other than an individual, the
previous education, experience, and qualifications of the persons
who will be in control of and charged with the operations of the
applicant ;
A general description of the operations which the applicant in-
tends to conduct and the method and type of equipment the appli-
cant proposes to use ; and
Such other information as the department may require.51
Licenses are effective for a calendar year unless revoked or sus-
pended and may be renewed annually. Prior to undertaking any oper-
ation authorized by the license, under normal circumstances a notice
of intention to perform a weather modification project must be filed
with the Department of Water Resources and shall Ix* published in a
newspaper having a general circulation and published within the
county, or in each of the counties, in which the operations are to be
* California Water Code. sec. 400. (The California weather modification law is reproduced
in entirety in app. I), p. 516.)
" Ibid., sec. 403.
353
conducted. If no newspaper is published within a particular county,
publication shall be in a newspaper with a general circulation within
that county. Published notices must include information on the nature
and object of intended operations, the person or persons on whose
behalf the project is to be performed, the area and approximate times
for conduct of the operations, and the area which may be affected by
the project to the extent that such area can be determined in advance.52
The requirement for published advance notification may be waived
in an emergency situation if the operations appear to the depart-
ment to be desirable in aiding extinguishment of fires. Furthermore,
at the request of the board of supervisors of a county or of the govern-
ing body of a city or a public district in the State, the department may
also grant a licensee permission to undertake seeding to alleviate a
drought emergency, without prior compliance with the need for pub-
lication of intent; however, the licensee must publish such notice as
soon as practicable after the granting of permission for emergency
seeding.
Licensees are required to maintain records of all operations, show-
ing the method and equipment used, times and places of operations,
and the names and addresses of all persons participating and assist-
ing in the operations. Immediately following completion of each
operation a report is to be filed. An evaluation statement for each
operation, including estimated precipitation gain or loss occurring
from the seeding activities and other supporting data, is to be pre-
pared and maintained by the operator, and it is to be submitted to
the department upon request.53
Weather modification projects
Cloud-seeding projects have been underway in California since the
late 1940's, and some projects sponsored by utility companies have
been continuous since the 1950's. Some operations are carried out dur-
ing the winter season to increase winter snowpack, whose runoff is
used for hydroelectric power generation and to augment water sup-
plies. Other projects are designed to increase summer rainfall for a
variety of water needs and for fighting forest fires.
Fifteen weather modification licenses were issued in California
during calendar vear 1977, and 14 projects were conducted within the
1977 water year/October 1, 1976 through September 30, 1977.54 Table
13 shows the projects active in the State during this period along with
licensed operators who were inactive during that year. Projects in the
table with an "E" following the project number were emergency pro-
grams, which nearly doubled the customary number of annual proj-
ects. The variety of public and private clients sponsoring opera-
tional projects in the State is seen in the fourth column. Note that,
while most of the licensees in the third column are commercial cloud-
seeding firms, other licenses are granted to some clients who provide
their own services and one license was given to a university research
group for participation in a research project of a U.S. Federal agency.
52 Ibid., sees. 402-410.
53 Ibid., sees. 411-412.
54 State of California, the Resources Agency. Department of Water Resources, Weather
Modification Activities in California ; Oct. 1, 1976 to Sept. 30, 1977.
354
TABLE 13.— WEATHER MODIFICATION PROJECTS IN CALIFORNIA: 1977 WATER YEAR
[From California Department of Water Resources, 1977]
Project No.
License
No. Licensee
Client
Target area
1-77-1.
l-77-2(E)
21-77-1
21-77-2
21-77-3(E)..
21-77-4(E).._
21-77-5(E).
21-77-6(E)_
22- 77-1.
23- 77-1.
23-77-2.
26-77-1.
34-77-1.
44-77 1(E).
North American Weather Con
suHants.
Santa Barbara Municipal Air
port, Goleta, Calif.
North American Weather Con
sultants.
Southern
Co.
California Edison
Upper San
watershed.
Joaquin River
Atmospherics, Inc
Calif.
Fresno,
.do
Nevada Irrigation District in
cooperation with Pacific
Gas & Electric Co.
Kings River Conservation
District.
do Kaweah Delta Water Conser-
vation District.
Yolo County Flood Control
and Water Conservation
District, Lake County,
Sonoma County, Mendocino
County, and Pacific Gas &
Electric Co., Yolo County,
Solano County Flood Con-
trol and Water Conserva-
tion District.
.do Los Angeles Department of
Water and Power.
21 do Kern County
21 do.. Desert Research Institute,
University of Nevada.
22
23
26
43
San Bernardino Valley Munic-
ipal Water District, San
Bernardino, Calif.
Pacific Gas & Electric Co., San
Francisco, Calif.
..do
San Bernardino Valley Munic-
ipal Water District.
Upper Middle Yuba River and
north side South Yuba River
above Spaulding Dam.
Upper Kings River watershed.
Kaweah River watershed.
Clear Lake, Indian Valley
Reservoir watersheds in
Lake County and added later
portions of Mendocino
County and that portion of
the Eel River drainage in
Lake County to all of that
county. Portions of Yolo
County and the watershed
above Lake Berryessa in
Napa County.
East slopes of the Sierra from
southwest of Lone Pine to
the southern portions of
Mono Basin.
Kern River above Isabella Dam.
Higher elevations of Tahoe
Basin and the Walker River
drainage basin.
Upper Santa Ana watershed.
Pacific Gas & Electric Co Lake Almanor drainage basin.
.do.
Santa Clara Valley Water Dis-
trict, San Jose, Calif.
Envaids Inc., Stockton, Calif..
Desert Research Institute En-
ergy and Atmospheric En-
vironmental Center, Uni-
versity of Nevada System,
Reno, Nev.
Sacramento Municipal Utility
District, Sacramento, Calif.
Joe Warburton, Desert Re-
search Institute, Reno, Nev.
Marin Municipal Water Dis-
trict, Corte Madera, Calif.
Institute of Earth, Planetary
and Life Sciences, Los An-
geles, Calif.
University of Washington,
Department of Atmospheric
Science, Seattle, Wash.
Weather Modification, Inc.,
Bowman, N. Dak.
45 Mr. Jack VanZandt, Teha-
chapi, Calif.
46 Weather Consultants, Inc.
Santa Barbara, Calif.
Santa Clara Valley Water Dis-
trict.
Licensee inactive this year...
do.
Sacramento Municipal Utility
District.
Licensee inactive this year
[see 21-77-6(E)[.
Licensee inactive this year
.do.
Transport and diffusion stud-
ies for U.S. Bureau of Rec-
lamation.
California Department of
Water Resources.
Licensee inactive this year..
do.
Upper Mokelumne River water-
shed.
Santa Clara County.
None.
Do.
Upper American River.
ISee 21-77-6CE).]
None.
Do.
American River Basin.
Summer cumulus program in
the mountains and uplands
of Mendocino County and
Mariposa County northward.
For a short period operations
were also carried out over
the Kern River drainage.
None.
Do.
355
0_ R E G ON
Figure 3. — California weather modification target areas, Oct. 1, 1976, through
Sept. 30, 1977. "E" following project number indicates emergency project.
(From California Department of Water Resources, 1977.)
The target areas, showing the area of the State covered by weather
modification projects during the 1977 water year, are shown on the
map in figure 3. For comparison, the relatively smaller areas of the
State covered in the two preceding years — October 1974 through Sep-
tember 1975 and October 1975 through September 1976 — are shown
in figure 4. The influence of the recent 1976-77 drought and attempts
to mitigate it through emergency cloud seeding account for the dra-
matically increased coverage for the reporting year ending Septem-
ber 1977. Seven projects were conducted during each of these 2 earlier
years, compared with 14 in 1976-77.35
53 State of California, the Resources Agency. Department of Water Resources. Weather
Modification Activities in California ; Oct. 1, 1974, to Sept. 30, 1975 ; and Oct. 1, 197o to
Sept. 30, 1976.
356
State-sponsored emergency projects
In July 1977, the State of California initiated its own emergency
cloud-seeding program, intended to alleviate drought conditions.
Weather Modification, Inc., of Bowman, N. Dak., was awarded a con-
tract with the Department of Water Resources, who were themselves
the client in this first operational weather modification project ever
to be funded by the State (see project No. 44r-77-l(E) in table 13).
Seeding was carried out in the Kern River watershed and over a wide
swath of the State extending from the Merced River north to the Ore-
gon border. Objectives of the program were to reduce fire danger and
to augment dwindling water supplies in drought-stricken northern
counties of the State.50 This summer emergency seeding was totally
supported by State funds.
56 Alexander. George, "State Seeks To Wring Rain From Clouds," Los Angeles Times,
July 2, 1977, pt. 1, pp. 1, 17.
357
Figure 4. — Target areas for seven weather modification projects conducted in
California for (a) water year 1975 (Oct. 1, 1974, through Sept. 30, 1975), and
(b) water year 1976 (Oct. 1, 1975, through Sept. 30, 1976). (From California
Department of Water Resources, 1975 and 1976.)
Under the Drought Emergency Act of 1977, the State received $300,-
000 in grants from the Bureau of Keclamation of the U.S. Department
of the Interior.57 A winter emergency weather modification program
has been initiated by the State, supported by these funds. Since the
winter project was initiated since October 1, 1977, it is not included in
57 See chapter 5, p. 266.
358
the projects listed in table 13 or shown in figure 3. The contractor for
these operations is Atmospherics, Inc., of Fresno, Calif. The emergency
funds from the Bureau of Reclamation are also supporting two weather
modification studies, one on the development of operational criteria
and the other on project evaluation.58
ILLINOIS
Illinois is an example of a Midwestern State in which there has
been a high degree of interest in weather modification, particularly
with regard to potential benefits to agriculture from increased rain-
fall and from decreased hail damage. The State does not finance
weather modification operations, but does encourage such activities,
supported through local private funding. The Illinois law, recently
passed in 1073. is concerned essentially with regulation of operations:
however, it is positive in that it fosters weather modification, with
proper controls and protection guarantees. The Illinois State water
survey has led in endorsing and in evaluating properly conducted
weather modification operations in the State and has a record of promi-
nent and extensive activity across a broad spectrum of weather modi-
fication research activities.
Illinois iceather modification, law and its administration
The Illinois State water survey initiated efforts in 1971 to develop
and secure a State law that would both permit and regulate weather
modification activities in Illinois. There was no previous law and such
a law was considered to be essential not only to insure proper execution
of weather modification experiments in the State but also ". . . for the
general benefit of citizens of Illinois through encouragement to prop-
erly conducted activities and protection from improperly conducted
weather modification operations." 59
Efforts thus begun in October 1971 were completed in September
1073 with enactment of the Illinois weather modification control bill
and its accompanying appropriation bill. It was intended to be a
"model" law, reflecting the best aspects of similar legislation in other
States and serving as a model for future legislation in other States.00, 61
Witti objectives of encouraging weather modification operations and
research and of minimizing possible adverse effects of such activities,
the Illinois Weather Modification Control Act contains three types
of provisions :
1. It establishes an institutional structure to deal with regula-
tion of cloud seeding activities ;
2. It contains substantive regulatory provisions controlling in-
tentional atmospheric manipulation in the State: and
3. It establishes basic rules of procedure according to which the
regulatory provisions will be enforced.02
The Illinois law is merely regulatory and does not authorize a State
government agency to carry out weather modification operations. In
68 Finlayson, Donald J., private communication.
";* Aekerman. William C., Stanley A. Changnori, Jr., and Ray Jay Davis. "The New
Weather Modification l-aw for Illinois. ' Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society,
vol. 55, No. 7, July 1974, p. 745.
60 Ibid.
61 The Illinois law (111. Ann. Stat. Oh. 140 3/4, § 1-32) in its entirety is found along with
those of other States in app. D. pp. 533 to 541.
*'■- Ackerman, Changnon, and Davis, "The New Weather Modification Law for Illinois,"
1974, p. 747.
359
the process of controlling weather modification operations, three State
entities are involved:
1. The weather modification board is composed of five Illinois resi-
dents, appointed by the director of the department of registration and
education, who have qualifications and practical experience in agri-
culture, law, meteorology, and water resources. The board meets an-
ually and at such times and places it determines. The director of the
department of registration and education can exercise his regulatory
authority only upon recommendation in a written report from the
majority of the members of the board.
2. The department of registration and education, working through
advisory groups like the weather modification board, supervises most
of the professional licensing in Illinois. All formal documents required
by the Weather Modification Control Act are issued by the depart-
ment.
3. The State courts are part of the institutional structure in that per-
sons adversely affected by weather modification are afforded a right to
judicial review of final administrative decisions of the department of
registration and education. The department may also seek a writ of in-
junction to restrain repetitious violations of the act.63
Regulatory provisions of the Illinois law prohibit a person's en-
gaging in weather modification activities (a) without both a profes-
sional weather modification license and a weather modification permit
for a specific project or (b) in violation of any term, condition, or limi-
tation of such license and permit. Some activities may be exempted
from license and permit requirements by administrative regulation.
Such exemptions are granted for research activities and for fire, frost,
or fog protection, so long as the exempted activities do not interfere
with operations conducted by permit.64 The rules of procedure, estab-
lished by the weather modification board and the department of regis-
tration and education are found in appendix M of this report. Under
these procedures One permit was granted in 1976 for a rain enhance-
ment project, and three were granted in 1977.65
Operational projects
The first permit for weather modification operations under the
Illinois law was obtained by a group of farmers and other interested
businessmen, called Rain, Inc., who contracted for cloud seeding serv-
ices in a five-county area in the southern part of the State. This area
was centered in Colt County, about 45 miles south of the Champaign-
Urbana area. This cooperative voluntary- funded organization initiated
an aircraft seeding program in July 1976. The program was renewed in
1977 ; however, there seemed to be less interest the second season owing
to less critical rainfall shortages. Evaluation of 1976 results by the Illi-
nois State Water Survey showed that there was an estimated*12- to 50-
percent rainfall increase.66
Another group of farmers from McLean County in north central
Illinois, organized as Rain Gain. Inc.. was formed in June 1977. and
contracted for weather modification operations, which began July 12.
AU1U.
85 Posse, E. Ray. member of Illinois weather modification board. Briefing before U.S. De-
partment of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board. Champaign, 111., Oct. 13.
1977.
66 Schilling. David. President. Rain. Inc.. briefing before the U.S. Department of Com-
merce Weather Modification Advisory Board, Champaign. 111., Oct. 13, 1977.
360
Rains were heavy during July, and the operations were stopped on
August 4. Costs for these operations were estimated at about 40 cents
per acre. There is a present attempt, along with the State water
survey, to evaluate results of the seeding, and the group is contemplat-
ing a second season of operations in 1978. 67
Research activities
The Illinois State Water Survey initiated research into the potential
of modifying the weather in the late 1960'S, recognizing the potential
for this emerging technology. In 1970 a major research effort was
launched by the survey in two general aspects of the subject: (1)
studies of inadvertent weather modification produced by cities and
industrial activities, and (2) studies of planned or intentional weather
modification. In the latter category the research is intended to answer
the questions of whether the weather can be modified and whether it
can be done beneficially without undue harm.68
The survey has been a national leader in studies on planned weather
modification. There has been a concentrated interest in experiments
to determine the usefulness of weather modification in Illinois and else-
where in the Middle West, recognizing that most U.S. weather modi-
fication operations have been conducted in the Great Plains and in the
Rockies where capabilities to augment precipitation have at least partly
been demonstrated. Thus, survey scientists have given considerable
attention to the design of experiments to increase summer rainfall and
to suppress hail. With some support from the National Science Foun-
dation (XSF) they have recently completed development of a design
for a major 8-year hail suppression experiment for Illinois. The State
is now ready to launch a hail experiment if it is determined desirable
to do so.69 Interest in hail suppression also led the survey to join with
other experts in performing an XSF-sponsored national-scale tech-
nology assessment of hail suppression.70
In 1968 the water survey also began a project to develop the design of
an experiment in precipitation modification, funded by the XSF and
the Bureau of Reclamation. A capability was developed in numerical
cloud modeling, using computers ; and a field program was initiated,
using meteorological aircraft and radar for sampling clouds to deter-
mine seedability criteria. After a major reduction in Federal support
during 1973 had curtailed this design project before its completion,
renewed support from the Bureau of Reclamation has enabled survey
scientists to develop a design for a rainfall modification experiment in
the High Plains. They are now prepared to resume design for a warm
rain experiment in Illinois, after completion of the cloud sampling
research.71
Survey scientists have discussed rainfall requirements with Midwest
agricultural interests and are developing a plan for a Midwestern rairi-
« Gildersleeve, Ben. Briefing before U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification
Advisory Board. Champaign. 111.. Oct. 13, 1077.
changnon. Stanley A., Jr.. "Accidental and Planned Weather Modification in Illinois,"
Water Resources Bulletin, vol. 13, No. 6, December 1077, p. 11 GO.
80 Ibid., p. 1172.
7" Changnon, Stanley A., Jr.. Ray Jay Davis. Barbara C. Farhar. J. Eugene Haas. J. Lore-
ena Ivens. Martin V. Jones. Donald A. Klein, Dean Mann. Griffith M. Morgan. Jr., Steven T.
Sonka, Earl R. Swanson, C. Robert Taylor, and Jon Van Blokland. "Hail Suppression ; Im-
pacts and Issues." Urbana, 111.. Illinois State Water Survey, April 1077. 432 pp. (A sum-
mary of the report has also been published : Farhar. Barbara C. Stanley A. Changnon. Jr.,
Farl R. Swanson, Ray Jay Davis, and J. Eugene Haas. "Hail Supression and Society," Ur-
bana. 111., Illinois State Water Survey. June 1077. 25 pp.)
71 Changnon, "Accidental and Planned Weather Modification in Illinois." 1077, pp. 1172-
1173.
361
fall modification experiment, along with representatives from agricul-
tural colleges in Midwestern States and from Federal Government
agencies. When funding is secured for this project, hopefully during
1978, the experiment will be initiated ; it will incorporate both physical
and statistical assessment of cloud and rainfall modifications as well
as studies of public attitudes and economic and ecological impacts from
altered precipitation.72
In an attempt to evaluate precipitation modification operations con-
ducted during the 1976 growing season in central Illinois, the survey
and the College of Agriculture at the University of Illinois installed a
rain gage network. Examination of these data led to a conclusion that
the seeded areas received 12 to 50 percent more rainfall ; however, the
differences could not be established as due to the seeding in view of the
small sample size (6 rain days) .73
Survey scientists have also participated in a number of experiments
on inadvertent weather modification, including the METROMEX in
the vicinity of St. Louis 74 and similar studies downwind of Chicago
and Kansas City. They have also studied effects on rainfall of the mas-
sive irrigation which has been developed in the Great Plains since
World War II.75
Over the past 10 years the survey has spent about $3 to $4 million in
weather modification research, including both planned and inadvertent
aspects. Of these funds about one-third was provided by the State,
while the remainder has come from various Federal agencies. The latter
include the National Science Foundation, the Bureau of Reclamation,
and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).76 The funds for
EPA-supported research in inadvertent weather change are not con-
sidered to be weather modification research by the EPA, so that agency
does not appear among the Federal agencies supporting weather modi-
fication in chapter 5.77
KANSAS
Kansas Weather Modification Act
In 197-1- Kansas leoislature passed H.B. 1216, known as the
Kansas Weather Modification Act, providing for licensing by the
State of all qualified persons who desire to engage in weather modifi-
cation activities within the State and requiring that a permit be ob-
tained for each specific activity.78 Responsibility for administering
the act is placed with the Kansas Water Resources Board ; however,
the law also requires the board to appoint an advisory committee to
assist the board's executive director in developing licensing standards
and report forms and to assist in other areas as directed by the board.
Rules and regulations prepared by the board and the advisory com-
mittee specify how the law is administered and procedures to follow
in applying for licenses and permits.79 The objectives of the rules and
regulations are to "encourage the development and evaluation of
weather modification technology, to protect the public through the
requirement that operators . . . possess certain basic qualifications, and
72 Ibid., p. 1173.
73 Ibid.
74 See chs. 4 and 5 for a discussion of METROMEX.
75 Changnon, "Accidental and Planned Weather Modification in Illinois," 1977, pp. 1173-
1174.
76 Changnon, Stanley A., Jr., briefinjr before U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modi-
fication Advisory Board. Champaign, 111., Oct. 13, 1977.
77 See p. 243, for list of Federal agencies reporting weather modification research pro-
grams.
78 The Kansas weather modification statute is reproduced in app. D, p. 543.
79 The rules and regulations are reproduced in app. M, p. 683.
362
to establish procedures for the issuance of permits with a minimum
of delay and to clarify administrative policy." 80
Research activities
Drought conditions during the spring of 1972 and pleas from agri-
cultural interests in western Kansas to "do something about it"
spurred the State to undertake plans for weather modification opera-
tions. Release of $100,000 in emergency funds by the legislature pro-
vided support for cloud seeding in northwestern Kansas, and the water
resources board was directed to manage the operations. The board
contracted with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to oversee the proj-
ect: however, prior to the start of the seeding, the drought situation
improved and emphasis was shifted from drought relief to weather
modification research. Since 1972 all weather modification activities
conducted by the State of Kansas have been experimental. Such
experiments were conducted under the management of the Bureau of
Reclamation for 9 weeks, starting August 5, 1972, near Colby, Kans.,
and for an 8- week period in the late summer of 1973 at Scott City,
Kans. During a 6-week period starting April 25, 1974, a demonstra-
tion project was conducted, with the target area again centered near
Scott City. This latter project was carried out by a commercial firm
under direct contract to the State board and also included funding
from four counties in the target area. Results of these experiments,
called the Kansas Cumulus projects (KANCUP), are summarized in
table 14.81
TABLE 14— SUMMARY OF THE KANSAS CUMULUS PROJECT (KANCUP) EXPERIMENTS
[From Kostecki: Weather Modification Activities in Kansas, 1972-77, 1977]
Project
Objectives
Assessment 1
KANCUP 1972, Aug. 5 to
Sept. 30 (cost $95,000,
fiscal year 1973).
KANCUP 1973, Aug. lb to
Oct. 5 (cost 558,000, fiscal
year 1974).
KANCUP 1974, Apr. 5 to
June 8 (cost $54,000, fiscal
year 1974).
Assuming technology works, seed for
rain increase; experiment with both
silver iodide (Agl) and hygroscopic
materials (salt); test ground release
of materials; inform general public
about project and technology.
Verify computer models of cloud proc-
esses; seed selectively with Agl and
salt; assess use of local pilots and
aircraft; inform general public about
project and technology.
Assess minimum operational require-
ments; seed with Agl and salt using
randomized controls; evaluate char-
acter and frequency of opportunities
in spring compared to summer;
infcrm general public about project
and technology.
Opportunities difficult to predict and recognize;
positive, predicted response to Agl on 2 of 16
days (20 percent of seeded cells); salt seeding
only occasionally encouraging; moderate
response on only 1 of 11 days (10 percent of
seeded cells); ground-based seeding unre-
liable; not enough attention given to control
clouds.
Models helpful; seeding frequently produced
predicted response; positive, predicted re-
sponse to Agl on 7 of 14 days (42 percent of
seeded cells); however, marginal response on
5 of the same 7 days; salt seeding on only 2
days; moderate response from 33 percent of
seeded cells; design and instrumentation
inadequate; local pilots need experienced
guidance to be effective.
Selective seeding sometimes produced desired
response; positive response to Agl on 8 of 13
days; however, marginal response on 6 of the
same 8 days; moderate resoonse to salt seed-
ing on 1 of 2 days; springtime cloud systems
usually more organized but seedabilily less
predictable; design and instrumentation
inadequate for remaining uncertainties.
KANCUP 1974 assessment done by KWRB personnel, following criteria given in KANCUP 1972 and 1973 final reports.
*° Kansas Water Resources Board, The Kansas Weather Modification Act; State statutes,
rules, and regulations plus applicable forms. State of Kansas. Topeka, 1!)77. p. ii.
« Kostecki. Donald F.. "Weather Modification Activities in Kansas; 1972-77." bulletin
No. 22, special report to the Governor and legislature, State of Kansas, Topeka. 1977,
pp. 1-3.
363
Since quantitative data from KANCUP experiments were limited
by time and funding, the board concluded that further projects of
similar type and refinement would not likely increase understanding
of weather modification science and technology. Consequently, start-
ing in fiscal year 1975 all appropriations have been directed to studies
on economic, social, legal, and environmental impacts of weather
modification wilthin the State.82
Earlier in this report plans and research activities to date under
the Bureau of Reclamation's High Plains Project (HIPLEX) were
discussed.83 One of three sites selected for HIPLEX is in the vicinity
of Goodland and Colby, Kans., where limited field activities were be-
gun in 1975, but where seeding experiments are to begin in 1979. The
States of Kansas, Colorado, and Nebraska have signed a Memoran-
dum of Understanding, agreeing to cooperate with the Bureau of
Reclamation in the planning and conduct of HIPLEX. Funding con-
tributed to the project by the States under this agreement is sum-
marized in table 11 in chapter 5.84 Under this agreement the Kansas
Water Resources Board will (1) establish and operate a data gather-
ing network in the Colby, Kans., area to provide data for agricultural,
environmental, and climatological research studies and to moni-
tor the effects of cloud seeding; (2) perform a wide range of associ-
ated studies including investigation of potential crop yield increases
and related economic benefits, the effects of additional moisture on
insects, crop disease vectors, incremental runoff and soil infiltration,
and study of social attitudes and acceptance of cloud-seeding tech-
nology; and (3) perform research to develop criteria for guiding
operational cloud-seeding decisions, including the initiation, suspen-
sion, and termination of seeding. For its part, the Bureau of Reclama-
tion will perform the atmospheric research and field tests, including
(1) design of the observation and cloud-seeding experiments, (2) proc-
essing and analysis of data to evaluate seeding effects and develop
and verify cloud models, and (3) coordination of research activities at
the Colby-Goodland site with the overall HIPLEX project.85
Pursuant to the cooperative agreement with the Bureau of Reclama-
tion, the Kansas Water Resources Board has initiated several studies.
Completed and on-going projects sponsored by the board since the
latter part of fiscal year 1974 are listed in table 15.
Table 15.
-Kansas research projects related to weather modification (source
Kostecki, 1977)
Title
A Survey of the Radar Echo Population over the
western Kansas High Plains.
Characteristics of Cumulus Cloud Fields over
western Kansas.
The Measurement of Silver Concentration in
Rainwater in Kansas.
A Comprehensive Study of the Effects of Alter-
ing the Precipitation Pattern on the Economy
and Environment of Kansas.
Data Collection and Analysis
Contractor
Department of Physics, Kan-
sas State University.
Department of Geography-
Meteorology, University of
Kansas.
Department of Geology, Uni-
versity of Kansas.
Kansas Agricultural, Experi-
ment Station.
Various Federal, State, and
local agencies.
82 Ibid., p. 2.
83 See ch. 5, p. 258.
84 See p. 263.
85 Kostecki, "Weather Modification Activities in Kansas
1972-77," 1977, p. 5.
364
Operational activities
Since the Kansas Weather Modification Act has been enacted there
has been only one license and permit sought and granted annually.
During the period April 15 through September 15 in each of the
recent 3 years the Muddy Road project has been conducted in west-
central and southwest Kansas, under the auspices of the Western Kan-
sas Groundwater Management District No. 1. Funds have been al-
most completely provided by groundwater management districts and
counties in the area. In 1975 the Muddy Road I project conducted
cloud seeding for rain increase on 39 days and for hail suppression on
27 days. Total cost for the 5-month seeding period was $80,000. The
Muddy Road II project in 1976 included 47 days of seeding for rain
enhancement and 25 days for hail suppression, at a cost of $153,000,
about $40,000 of which was granted to the project by the Ozarks Re-
gional Commission. During 1977 the Muddy Road III project in-
cluded seeding for rain on 50 days, during 28 of which hail seeding
was also conducted ; there were also 7 days for exclusive hail suppres-
sion. The $180,000 for operating expenses during 1977 was raised by
the counties and groundwater districts but these funds were partly
reimbursed in September through a grant under the Emergency
Drought Act of 1977.86' 87
The Kansas law does not require evaluation of results of a weather
modification project; however, the rules and regulations do require
that a final report be submitted within 90 days following the close of
the project. Information required includes daily records during the
project period of starting and ending times and location of seeding,
the type of clouds seeded, and the purpose of the seeding activity, as
well as the permit holder's interpretation of the project effects in com-
parison with those anticipated in the permit application. This eval-
uation is, generally speaking, qualitative, based on the project meteor-
ologists' recollections of cloud response observed by radar during
seeding. Effects of the Muddy Road projects have been evaluated in
this manner, with the conclusion that additional rain was obtained
and crop damage was reduced by the seeding. In order to assist in a
more quantitative evaluation, the Muddy Road project has been
provided by the State Water Resources Board with a computer term-
inal linked* to the Bureau of Reclamation's Environmental Data Net-
work.88 Products from the data network provide the project meteor-
ologist with daily decision criteria for cloud seeding and could also
be used to evaluate operating procedures and effectiveness of seeding
if additional information were available. Due to lack of staff and lack
of sufficient data for an adequate evaluation, detailed evaluation of
the Muddy Road projects has not yet been conducted. However, an
independent evaluation of the three seasons of cloud seeding in Mud-
dy Road is currently being attempted on all available data, using funds
provided under the Emergency Drought Act of 1977.89
Emergency Drought Act of 1977
In October 1977. the Kansas Water Resources Board was awarded a
grant of $300,000 from the Bureau of Reclamation under the provisions
of the Emergency Drought Act of 1977.90 A limitation of this grant
wfiSstecki!' ^Weather Modification Activities in Kansas; 1972-77," 1977, pp. 10-11.
» K^Steckt,' 'leather Modification Activities in Kansas ; 1972-77," 1977, pp. 11-12.
90 See ch. 5, p. 267.
365
was that all funds had to be expended by January 31, 1978; conse-
quently, the grant was used primarily to purchase equipment for future
summer seeding operation measurements and evaluations. A portion
of the fimds has been used to commission an evaluation of the opera-
tional projects under Muddy Road, conducted by local groundwater
districts and counties in western Kansas.91
Following an exchange of letters between the board and the Bureau
of Reclamation, the grant, under Public Law 95-18, was approved with
the following conditions and limitations :
1. The request was increased from the $218,600 to $300,000 because of
the probability of an understimation of equipment costs. (This total
was subsequently adjusted to $293,000.)
2. Expenditures of grant funds by the State were to be limited to
equipment purchased and available for operational use on or before
January 31, 1978.
3. All funds not expended by January 31, 1978, were to be returned
to the U.S. Government.
4. In the event that the Kansas legislature did not appropriate funds
to implement the cloud-seeding program, or that such funds were not
provided by other non-Federal sources for use during the 1978 irriga-
tion season, all equipment purchased with the grant funds were to be re-
turned to the U.S. Government.92
Of the total funds granted, $22,000 was used to reimburse sponsors
of the operational cloud-seeding program in Western Kansas (Muddy
Road), for the cost of operations during September 1977. The evalua-
tion of the operational programs conducted during the 1975, 1976, and
1977 seasons was contracted for $27,000. The remaining expenditures
were for repair and replacement of equipment or purchase of new
equipment for use within Groundwater Management District No. 1 or
for general use- by the Kansas Water Resources Board in the future.93
NORTH DAKOTA
Weather modification law and administration of regulations
The State of North Dakota is active in the encouragement and the
regulation of weather modification projects. As stated in the following
excerpt from the State law. North Dakota claims ownership of all water
acquired within its boundaries through weather modification activities :
Tn order that the State may share to the fullest extent in the benefits
already gained through fundamental research and investigation on new
and improved means for predicting, influencing, and controlling the weather,
for the best interest, general welfare, health, and safety of all the people of the
State, and to provide proper safeguards in applying the measures for use in con-
nection therewith in order to protect life and property, it is deemed necessary and
hereby declared that the State of North Dakota claims its sovereign right to use
the moisture contained in the clouds and atmosphere within the sovereign State
boundaries. All water derived as a result of weather modification operations shall
be considered a part of North Dakota's basic water supply and all statutes, rules,
and regulations applying to natural precipitation shall also apply to precipitation
resulting from cloud seeding.94
01 Kostecki. "Weather Modification Activities in Kansas ; 1972-77," 1977. p. 14.
92 Kansas Water Resources Board, final report ; Emergency Drought Act (Contract No.
State-07-70-X0017), (preliminary draft), Topeka, Feb. 3, 1978, p. 2.
93 Ibid., pp. 6-8.
94 North Dakota Century Code, ch. 2-07. "Weather Modification. Sec. 2-07-01. Ownership
of Water." (Pertinent sections of the North Dakota Century Code, dealing with weather
modification, are reproduced in app. D, p. 573.)
34-857 O - 79 - 26
366
The policy of the State toward weather modification is summarized
as follows :
The legislative assembly finds that weather modification affects the public
health, safety, and welfare, and that, properly conducted, weather modification
operations can improve water quality and quantity, reduce losses from weather
hazards, and provide economic benefits for the people of the State. Therefore, in
the public interest, weather modification shall be subject to regulation and con-
trol, and research and development shall be encouraged. In order to minimize pos-
sible adverse effects, weather modification operations shall be carried on with
proper safeguards, and accurate information shall be recorded concerning such
operations and the benefits obtained therefrom by the people of the State.05
North Dakota encourages weather modification research and develop-
ment through its laws and regulations and through State-supported
research projects ; however, there is also a fairly well-developed scheme
for regulation and control of operational activities. State law also per-
mits local jurisdictions to raise funds to support local weather modifica-
tion operations, in which the State shares funding.
Regulation of weather modification activities takes place to some ex-
tent through application of certain provisions of environmental and
aviation laws; however, there are specific portions of the North Dakota
Century Code that are directly applicable.96 Control, regulation, and
coordination of weather modification projects, through the issuance
of licenses and permits and promulgation of rules and regulations, is
vested in the North Dakota Weather Modification Board, which oper-
ates under the direction and supervision of the State's aeronautics
commission. The board is composed of the director of the aeronautics
commission, a representative of the environmental section of the State
department of health, the State engineer of the water conservation dis-
trict, and seven other members, appointed by the Grovernor, one from
each of seven lists of three nominees given to him by the weather modi-
fication authorities from seven districts in the State. The seven districts
are comprised of geographical groupings of the State's 53 counties.97
The powers and duties of the board include :
1. Authority to appoint an executive secretary to serve at the
board's discretion and to perform such duties as assigned by the
board.
2. Authority to employ such a staff as is necessary to carry out the
provisions of the law.
3. Preparation of reasonable rules and regulations concerning li-
censing and permits ; standards and instructions governing operations,
monitoring, and evaluation; and recordkeeping and reporting of
activities.
4. Authority to contract for weather modification operations; with
the requirement that the board must also cany on monitoring and
evaluation activities in connection with such operations.
5. Authority to order operators whose activities are in violation of
the law to cease and desist from further operations.
6. Cooperation and contracting with Federal, local, and State agen-
cies whose activities are similar to the work of the board and are con-
sistent with the intent and purpose of the State law. The board may
also, in accordance with the law, accept grants or services from com-
as i 1 ill. sec 2 "7 01.1, "Declaration of Policy and Purpose."
80 See app. D, p. 573.
07 North Dakota Century Code, sees. 2-07-02.1, 2-07-02.2, and 2-07-02.3.
367
missions, organizations, agencies, or persons and use such funds or
services to carry out the provisions of the law.
7. Authority to administer and enforce the provisions of the law.
8. Maintain interstate contact with bordering States and provinces
for the purposes of coordinating interstate weather modification proj-
ects. North Dakota is a member of the North American Interstate
Weather Modification Council, through which the board attempts to
provide an input to such Federal weather modification laws and regu-
lations which may be enacted and impact on North Dakota.98
In addition to the responsibilities and authorities listed above, based
upon the State law, the Governor of North Dakota has also charged
the boa rd with the following tasks :
1. Assure that operations are concerned with the health, safety, and
welfare of the public.
2. Make certain that research and operational aspects of weather
modification activities are concerned with improvement of water qual-
ity and distribution as well as quantity.
3. Insure that the weather modification program is seriously con-
'cerned with reduction of losses from such weather hazards as severe
storms, excessive rainfall, and hail.
4. Guarantee that the program is designed to improve both the
social and economic benefits to all segments of the State's population.
5. Assure that all activities are prefaced with appropriate technical
planning and scientific research."
Licenses are required for weather modification operations in North
Dakota, and for each project a permit must be obtained. Rules of
eligibility for licensees and procedures for application for licenses and
permits, in accordance with the State law, are detailed in "Rules and
Regulations Relating to Weather Modification Operations," published
by the Weather Modification Board.1 Application for a license must
include information on the applicant's former record of applications
elsewhere ; previous instances of refusal, suspension, or revocation of
a license ; and a statement of qualifications for individuals designated
to be in control of operations, including : education, professional mem-
berships, professional certificates or licenses, experience, publications
and patents, and professional references who will attest to the appli-
cant's character. Applicants meeting minimum requirements and ap-
proved by the board are granted licenses to conduct weather modi-
fication operations in North Dakota for 1 calendar year; however,
licenses may be renewed annually upon reapplication and board ap-
proval. Causes for which the board may suspend, revoke, or refuse to
renew a license include incompetency, dishonest practice, false or
fraudulent information in obtaining a license or permit, failure to
comply with provisions of the weather modification laws or with
rules promulgated by the board, and violation of any permit or permit
condition.2
98 Rose. R. Lynn (executive secretary of the North Dakota Weather Modification Board).
Testimony before the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board,
Grand Forks, N. Dak., Aug. 27, 1977.
69 Ibid.
1 North Dakota Weather Modification Board. "Rules and Regulations Relating to Weather
Modification Operations" (published in a booklet along with rules of practice and procedure
ertaining to hearings before the board, adopted July 1. 1976 ; and North Dakota Century
ode. chapter 2-07, weather modification, SL-75, 5i pp. The rules and regulations relat-
ing to weather modification operations are reproduced in app. M, p. 691.)
2 Ibid., pp. 5-7.
368
Permits are required for each project to be conducted by a licensee
and may be issued following satisfactory application for a permit,
public comment and possible hearings, recommendation by the direc-
tor of the Weather Modification Board, and final action by the board.
Information accompanying the application must include the appli-
cant's Xorth Dakota license number ; data on any previous suspension,
revocation, or refusal of permits; registration to do business in North
Dakota; registration of pilots and aircraft with the North Dakota
Aeronautics Commission; evidence of financial responsibility; and a
complete description of the operational plan, which includes:
1. The nature and object of the operation ;
2. The legal description of. and a map showing the operations
area and the target area;
3. The approximate starting date of the operation and its an-
ticipated duration ;
•i. The kind of seeding agent (s) intended for use and the antici-
pated rate of their use ;
5. A list of equipment which will be used and the method (s) of
seeding for which they will be used ;
6. An emergency shutdown procedure, which states conditions
under which operations will be suspended because of possible dan-
ger to the public health, safety, and welfare or to the environ-
ment ;
7. The means by which the operation plans will be iumlemented
and carried out, such as the location of the main operational office
and any other offices used in connection with the operation : the
location of ground equipment such as seeding generators, radar,
and evaluation instrumentation ; the number and kinds of aircraft
which will be used ; and the extent to which weather data will be
made available to the licensees and other personnel carrying out
the project ; and
8. How conduct of the operation will interact with or affect
other weather modification operations.3
The board gives notice of its consideration of a particular permit
application and allows 20 days for public comment on the proposed
project. Upon receiving objection or on its own motion, the board
may conduct a hearing after at least 10 more days of further notice
iu a newspaper circulated in the county where the notice of considera-
tion was first published. Within 45 days after close of the comment
period the board takes action to approve or disapprove a permit re-
quest, taking into consideration recommendations from the director
of the board and testimony received at the hearing. The board may
attach conditions which it deems appropriate to permits which it other-
wise approves. Such conditions may include modifications or restric-
tions to methods and times of operation, change of target and opera-
tions areas, safety precautions, and recordkeeping. Permits may be
suspended, revoked, or modified if the board perceives that such action
is necessary, either on the basis of noncompliance with conditions of
the permit by the operator or the general welfare of the people of the
State. Permits expire on December 31 of the year in which they are
issued and may not be renewed.4
The Weather Modification Board, under rules which they are to
3 Ibid., pp. 8-9.
* Ibid., pp. 9-10.
369
publish, may exempt the following activities from permit and license
requirements :
1. Research and development in weather modification conducted by
the State, political subdivisions of the State, colleges and universities
of the State, agencies of the Federal Government, or bona fide research
corporations.
2. Weather modification operations of an emergency nature taken
against fire, frost, or fog.
Such exempted activities are to be conducted in such a way that they
will not unduly interfere with weather modification projects conducted
under a permit.5
There is also another statute provision in North Dakota which en-
ables the State to suspend weather modification activities if precipita-
tion enhancement could contribute to the severity of a disaster such as
a flood. This provision, which supersedes authorities given to the board
to issue permits in times of such disasters, states that :
The Division of Disaster Emergency services shall keep continuously apprised
of weather conditions which present danger of precipitation or other climatic
activity severe enough to constitute a disaster. If the division determines that
precipitation that may result from weather modification operations, either hy
itself or in conjunction with other precipitation or climatic conditions or activity,
would create or contribute to the severity of a disaster, it shall direct the officer
or agency empowered to issue permits for weather modification operations to
suspend the issuance of the permits. Thereupon, no permits may be issued until
the division informs the officer or agency that the danger has passed.8
The rules and regulations disseminated by the weather modification
board require the keeping of records and the submission of reports.
Permittees must complete and retain daily logs and monthly sum-
maries for the activities of each unit of weather modification apparatus
used during an operation, obtain and retain copies of all daily precipi-
tation records available for the target area from the National Weather
Service, keep a roster of the names and addresses of all employees
participating in an operation for which a permit has been issued, and
permit duly authorized agents of the board to inspect any equipment
and records required. Persons conducting projects exempted from
permit requirements by the board must maintain all of the same kinds
of records required of permittees.7
Within 10 days after the conclusion of each calendar month permit-
tees must submit a written report to the board, including the following
information :
1. A copy of the monthly summary record of activity for each
unit of weather modification apparatus used in the operations;
2. A copy of the roster of all names and addresses of employees
participating in the operations;
3. A copy of the Federal interim activity report filed for that
month with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-
tion, in accordance with rules adopted under the authority of
Public Law 92-205 8 ; and
-i. A narrative account of the manner in which operations dur-
ing the month did not conform to the operational plan filed with
the permit application.
5 North Dakota Century Code. sec. 2-07-03.1.
6 North Dakota Century Code. sec. 37-17.1-15.
7 Nort1- Dakota Weather Mortification Board. "Rules and Regulations Relating to Weather
Modification Operations," pp. 11-12.
8 See ch. 5, p. 232,
370
Within 30 days after final completion of the operation, a permittee
must file a final report with the board which is to include (1) copies
of the daily logs on usage of units of apparatus and of the total usage
for each unit for the entire operational period, (2) a copy of the final
Federal activity report filed with the National Oceanic and Atmos-
pheric Administration, and (3) a narrative account of the manner
in which the operation did not conform to the operational plan filed
with the permit application.9
Within 60 days after completion of an operation, the permittee
must file with the board a narrative evaluation of the operation. Data
in this report is to be assembled in conformance with the evaluation
plan submitted with the permit application. The board may choose to
require all or any of these reports to be filed by persons conducting
weather modification projects excluded from permit requirements.10
Authority and organization for local projects
In 1965 the North Dakota legislature enacted a law,11 which author-
ized electors of townships within the State to levy taxes for weather
modification activities, if approved by a majority vote at annual town-
ship meetings. This action, however, did not stimulate uniform cloud
seeding projects and resulted in a checkerboard pattern of participat-
ing townships over the State. In the same year the legislature enacted
chapter 2-07 of the State code,12 authorizing boards of county com-
missioners to levy up to 2 mills on net taxable valuation of property
in the county for a weather modification fund, upon majority approval
in a county wide election. No counties are known to have taken ad-
vantage of this provision, and the legislature amended chapter 2-07
in 1969 to provide for county weather modification authorities, which
can request the board of county commissioners to levy up to 2 mills
for cloud-seeding purposes. Seven counties used this provision for the
1970 season, and 10 additional authorities were created in 1973 and
1974 as dry summers brought about more interest.13
North Dakota law specifies that the county authorities are created
for a 10-year period, either by petition or by countywide election. The
17 authorities established through 1975 were all formed on the basis
of petitions containing signatures of at least 51 percent of voting resi-
dents in the county. When two counties included a question on crea-
tion of an authority in county elections in 1976, both attempts failed.
The law also provides for repeal of authorities through similar pro-
cedures, and opposition groups succeeded in obtaining signatures of
at least 51 percent of the voters on petitions repealing authorities in
six counties during the winter of 1976-77.14
Amendments to the North Dakota weather modification law (Cen-
tury Code, chapter 2-07) passed by the legislature during 1975 re-
quired the North Dakota Weather Modification Board to establish
weather modification districts and an advisory committee for each
9 North Dakota Weather Modification Board, ' Rules and Regulations Relating to Weather
Modification Operations," pp. 12-13.
10 Ihid.. p. 13.
11 North Dakota Century Code. sec. 58-03-07, powers of electors.
]- North Dakota Century Code, ch. 2-07, weather modification.
"Schock, Martin R., "Weather Modification Activities in Nort*> Dakota. South Dakota,
and Minnesota from 19*53 Through 1976," University of North Dakota. Department of Avia-
tion, Grand Forks. N. Dak.. June 1077 (sponsored by U.S Department of the Interior. Bu-
reau of Reclamation, Division of Atmospheric Water Resources Management, HIPLEX
program ) . ]>. 5.
"Ibid., p. 6.
371
district. Seven such districts have been formed on the basis of clusters
of counties having authorities, although all 53 counties are assigned
to one of the seven districts. Each county authority, with five persons
managing the program from the county level, sets up annual program
objectives, requests funds from the county commission, and holds an
annual meeting. The multicounty districts then form the second level
of local administration, through the operations advisory committees,
composed of one representative from each county within the district.
The committee, meeting monthly throughout the operational season
and sporadically during the remainder of the year, formulates basic
goals and policies for the project in the given district along State
guidelines and reviews all activities.15
Annually, individual contracts are drawn up between the State
Weather Modification Board and the county authorities, written as
service contracts and defining in detail the operations advisory com-
mittee organization, weather modification services provided, responsi-
bilities of each party, and funding. For all counties within an opera-
tional district the contracts are identical for all counties, except for
county funding amounts.16
The Weather Modification Board is empowered to receive and ex-
pend funds which may become available from Federal grants or
appropriations, gifts, bequests, and county funds received for weather
modification. With the exception of funds received from the counties,
the board may spend any of these funds for the encouragement of
research and development in weather modification by private persons,
the North Dakota State University, the University of North Dakota,
or any other appropriate public agency in the State, through direct
grant, contract, or other means. All such funds are transferred to the
State Treasurer and placed in a weather modification fund. County
weather modification authorities which have contracted with the State
board for weather modification services contribute to the State
weather modification fund in accordance with the determination of
the board regarding funding necessary to provide the county with
weather modification services.17
North Dakota operational projects in 1975 and 1976
In accordance with the provisions of the North Dakota Century
Code and the rules and regulations of the Weather Modification
Board, operational projects in the State were sponsored by local or
regional weather modification associations through the 1975 season.
Since that year all regional projects have been conducted by the State
under the North Dakota cloud modification project, in conjunction
with weather modification associations. Figures 5 and 6 shows the
regions covered by weather modification operations during the 1975
and 1976 seasons, respectively, in North Dakota, South Dakota, and
Minnesota. (The latter two States are included in the maps since data
on their activities were also part of the report from which North
Dakota information was obtained.18 The cross-hatched circle in west-
ern South Dakota in figure 5 indicates the general location of a
research project during 1975.
15 Rose, testimony before the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advi-
sory Board, August 1977.
19 Ibid.
17 North Dakota Century Code. sees. 2-07-11 and 2-07-11.1.
18 Schock. "Weather Modification Activities in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minne-
sota from 1951 Through 1976," June 1977, pp. 62, 64.
372
Figure 5. — Counties in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota in which
operational weather modification projects were conducted during 1975. (The
cross-hatched area indicates the approximate target area for a research proj-
ect.) (From Schock. 1977.)
Figure 6.— Counties in North Dakota. South Dakota, and Minnesota in which
operational weather modification projects were conducted during 1976. (From
Schock. 1977.)
373
Tables 16 and IT provide information on the projects in the three
States for the 1975 and 1976 seasons, respectively, as shown in the
maps in figures 5 and 6. Reference numbers where footnoted in the first
column of the tables correspond to North Dakota projects. Other col-
umns identify operators, sponsors, operational periods, seeding agents,
delivery modes, whether or not the project incorporated randomized
seeding, and the objectives. Xote that none of the operational projects
included random seeding.
Figure 7 shows the number of years from 1951 through 1976 that
counties in the three-State area were totally or partially included
in target areas of weather modification projects, according to an inten-
sive study of projects in the area over this timespan by Schock.19
Statistics on these projects are given in table 18.
19 Ibid., pp. 15-15.
374
co c
o E
2^
c —
Ere™
1 -o o »1
l T3 -o •
c 00 :E-2
. <*>-o 0- 3
■a o ^
a. >- -o . - oo" =>■ oo
Q.cuc3j2«j.B-c=
'= «J ro oj " QJ ="-5
;I|i-?I:s i
t; co ° O co -° ^ co o^J-"
" iH-s s = 5 s s.es i
,± £ ^g20.i £ S J; O _
m oo .™ i nun oo-Q (_ s oh
£■■5
£ cd .
a> 52
05 "re
o CD
3"
»- CO o
» 1 £ .
c n ™ «m
o o-o^- |
^ TO CO CO *->
c g> fl> u
- C CO.i;-0
5 CD CO «, C
OO.Q
; 2 I
ID
te (4 percer
le (2 percei
rotechnics.
« .
%~
o _r
CO
CO
1 -5
l-S
-rCD
»
1!
Agl
t
— -O
oo
<
1975..
1975.
CO
CO
to Aug.
to Aug
ID
June
May
ikota
>ocia-
c
o
to
o
festern NortI
Suppression
Weather M<
ciation, Inc.
— -O
OO
r-< O
375
376
Figure 7. — Counties in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota which were
partially or totally included in weather modification target areas during the
years 1951 through 1976. The numbers indicate the number of seasons during
that time period that a given county included target areas for weather modifi-
cation projects. (From Schock, 1977.)
Table 18. — Statistics on operational and research weather modification projects
conducted in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota during the period
1951 through 1976.
Number of projects 63
Number of seasons projects conducted 162
Number of research projects 14
Number of seasons research projects conducted 27
Number of research projects financed totally with Federal dollars 9
Number of applied projects for which Federal dollars supported an evalua-
tion 2
Maximum number of counties in applied projects during a single year
(1974) 64
Source : Schock, 1977.
SOUTH DAKOTA
In the late 1940's and early 1950's there was a proliferation of
weather modification projects throughout the Great Plains, and as
much as 50 percent of the State of South Dakota is estimated to have
been under cloud seeding during the peak years. Financed through
voluntary contributions mostly from farmers and ranchers, the tech-
niques most often employed ground-based silver iodide generators.
The first weather modification legislation in South Dakota, enacted in
1953, established the South Dakota Weather Control Commission and
instructed the commission to promote and regulate cloud-seeding
activit ies.-°
20 Donnan, John A.. Jackson L. Pellett, Richard S. Leblang, and Loo F. Hitter, "The Rise
and Fall of the South Dakota Weather Modification Program," the Journal of Weather
Modification, vol. 8, No. 1, April 197G, pp. 1-2.
377
There was no Government support of weather modification until
1955, so that all projects until that year were voluntarily funded. In
1955 the legislature amended the State law, authorizing each county
to levy up to 1 mill on assessed valuation to support weather modifi-
cation. Counties took advantage of this new authority and some joined
together so that cooperative projects could be conducted in blocks of
contiguous counties. In 1959 the State Board of Regents established the
Institute of Atmospheric Sciences at South Dakota School of Mines
and Technology, and the first Federal funds for weather modification
were made available to the institute in 1961. Through 1970 at least
$3,800,000 in Federal funds had been invested in the State to study
summertime cumulus clouds and thunderstorms and to develop
weather modification techniques, mostly from the Bureau of Reclama-
tion, but also from the Defense and Commerce Departments and from
the National Science Foundation.21
The "Weather Control Commission instructed the Institute of Atmos-
pheric Sciences to develop an operational weather modification plan
for the State in 1969, and in February 1970 individuals representing
various sections of the State's economy were invited to review and
give direction to such a possible operational program. To coordinate
development efforts the South Dakota Water Development Associa-
tion was established from those assembled. In April of that year the
executive committee of the Legislative Research Council included
this program among its studies of the year and in June and September
the Agriculture and Conservation Committee of the Legislative Re-
search Council heard testimony in support of a statewide weather
modification program. In October the committee approved an amend-
ment to the existing weather modification law, directing the Weather
Control Commission to carry out a statewide program of precipitation
management and appropriating $100,000 in State funds to develop
the program. The bill was subsequently approved, March 17, 1971, by
a two-thirds majority of both legislative houses, as required for all
special appropriations bills.22
The Commission was attached to the State Department of Agricul-
ture for administrative purposes, but was given full authority to direct
the design and development of the program. In April 1971 the com-
mission selected a director, who assumed his position in September and
immediately began planning the statewide program for the summer of
1972. To emphasize and obtain local support, contact was made with
and support sought from agricultural organizations, water groups, and
the South Dakota County Commissioners Association. Counties were
asked to participate in the program, and it was proposed that one
commissioner from each participating county serve on a Weather Modi-
fication Advisory Committee, each with complete control over cloud
seeding activities in his county. The Weather Control Commission
established a cost share ratio of 25 percent for the county versus 75
percent for the State. Of the State's 67 counties, 26 agreed to partici-
pate during the 1972 summer season and entered into contract with
the Commission. As shown in figure 8, 21 of these counties constituted
a nearly solid block in the southeast part of the State, 3 were in a
block in the Black Hills, and 2 other large counties were in the ex-
21 Ibid., pp. 2-3.
22 Ibid., pp. 3-4.
378
treme northwest corner of the State, constituting a combined land area
of 17,181,000 acres.23
In 1972 the legislature passed another special appropriation meas-
ure, requiring two-thirds support in both houses, which provided
$250,000 to support the 1972 operational program and administrative
functions of the Commission for fiscal year 1973. About $90,000 was
received in cost-share .funds from participating counties. In view of
insufficient funds, full-scale operations were conducted only in the
southeast part of the State, and supplemental support was provided
elsewhere ; 1972 field operations, costing about 3.2 cents per acre, were
performed under contract to the State by private firms.24
▲
± Aircraft
Figure 8. — Twenty-six counties in South Dakota which contracted with the
State Weather Control Commission in the first year of the statewide weather
modification program during the 1972 operating season. (From Donnan, Pellett,
Leblang, and Ritter, 1976.)
23 Ibid., pp. 4-6.
24 Ibid., pp. 6-8.
379
Figure 9. — Forty-six counties in South Dakota which contracted with the State
Weather Modification Commission and participated in the statewide weather
modification program during the 1974 operating season. (From Donnan, Pellett,
Leblang, and Hitter, 1976.)
The special State appropriation for 1973 approved by the legislature
was $643,818, supplemented by $190,141 in county funds and $7,000
from the Federal Government. The law was also amended that year to
make changes in the administrative structure and in regulations. The
Weather Control Commission became the Weather Modification Com-
mission with modified membership provisions, the Commission and all
of its functions were transferred to the Department of Natural Ke-
sources, and license and permit requirements and violation penalties
were instituted.25 The 1973 summer operating season began May 1, with
42 participating counties, divided into 6 operational districts.26
Plans for the 1974 season included the intent for 46 counties to par-
ticipate, constituting 29,547,000 acres. In the fall of 1973 the Governor
considered the program so well established that he included its f unding
in his general appropriations bill, requiring only a simple majority vote
for passage. The $803,700 included was to fund operations for July
and August 1974 and May and June 1975. A special appropriation bill
was also introduced to provide $171,000 for contracted services in May
and June 1974. Both bills passed the legislature, and $243,600 in county
moneys and $30,200 in Federal funds were also available. The latter
funds were received from the Bureau of Reclamation and were to be
used for evaluation of operations. The overall cost of the 1974 seeding
program was 3.6 cents per acre.27 Counties participating in this peak
year for the statewide program are shown on the map in figure 9.
25 The present South Dakota statutes relating to weather modification are reproduced in
app. D, p. G04.
16 Donnan, et al., "The Rise and Fall of the South Dakota Weather Modification Pro-
gram," 1976, pp. 8-11.
"Ibid., pp. 12-14.
380
For the 1975 summer seeding season, 45 counties expressed interest in
participation. The Commission developed an increased emphasis on
public information through over 100 public meetings in the fall and
winter of 1974-75, institution of a daily news release program during
the 1975 operational season, and expansion of the advisory committee to
include representatives from all the counties in each district. The fiscal
year 1976 budget was again included in the general appropriations bill.
Although evaluations had indicated positive results from the previous
seeding, South Dakota was suffering from a potentially severe drought
and the mood of the legislature was less supportive than in earlier
years. An attempt to move the appropriations from the general appro-
priations bill to a special appropriation requiring a two-thirds vote
test was defeated, however, and $776,500 was approved for fiscal year
1976. With county funds, the total budget for that year was $1,076,800,
and another $41,500 from the Bureau of Reclamation was provided to
support evaluations.28
With the approach of the 1976 summer season, 42 counties provided
letters of intent to participate, and the proposed budget in the Gover-
nor's fiscal year 1977 general appropriations bill included $855,000 for
the statewide weather modification program. It became obvious that the
group opposing the State program had become well organized and in-
fluential. Concentrating their efforts in a few key counties where the
commissioners were overwhelmed by groups of strong opponents, the
opposition was instrumental in changing the decisions to participate
by those counties. In turn, these actions had negative effects on neigh-
boring counties. Consequently the 42 counties indicating intention to
participate in 1976 dwindled to 22 counties which signed contracts with
the Weather Modification Commission. In the legislature, meanwhile,
there was a successful move to remove the weather modification budget
from the Governor's general appropriation bill. A special appropria-
tion bill was promptly introduced, along with two other weather modi-
fication bills. One would have repealed the entire, existing weather
modification law, and the other would have required a hearing by each
county commission prior to issuance of a permit. None of these bills, in-
cluding the special appropriation measure, passed the legislature, so
that no funds were available to conduct the State program in fiscal year
1977. The Weather Modification Commission continued to function
as the State regulatory agency for issuance of licenses and permits.29
Support of operational weather modification projects in South Da-
kota reverted, therefore, to the pattern of private and county funding
which existed prior to establishment of the statewide program, and
the number of such projects decreased dramatically. With funds avail-
able for part of the 1976 season, the State weather modification pro-
vided some support to local projects in nine southeastern counties and
to three counties in the northwest. The latter joined with the proiect in
southwestern North Dakota for the 1976 season. The South Dakota
Commission also contracted with the State of North Dakota to carry
out an evaluation program for 1976 operations in South Dakota.
Another five-county area in the eastern part of the State operated a
project with no State support during September 1976, originating after
2* Ibid., pp. 12-14.
29 Ibid., pp. 14-16.
381
the drought extended into that area.30 Counties included in projects
carried out in South Dakota during 1975 and 1976 are shown in the
maps in figures 5 and 6, and information on these projects is included
in tables 16 and 17, all of which appear in the section on the discussion
of North Dakota activities.
Four weather modification bills were introduced into the 1977 legis-
lature, one of which was a special appropriation bill which would have
provided 50-percent State support to operations in the estimated 30
counties interested in such a cooperative program. The special appro-
priation failed as did the other bills, and during 1977 only Harding
County, in the northwest, sponsored a seeding program, using county
funds and contracting with the adjacent project in North Dakota for
some of the required services. An attempted 1977 cooperative project in
five southeastern counties, supported by private and some county funds,
did not get underway. No weather modification bills were presented in
the 1978 legislature, though minimal funding has been approved by the
legislature in the past two sessions in the general appropriations bill
to maintain the Weather Modification Commission.31
UTAH
The State of Utah has both one of the largest State weather modifica-
tion programs and one of the more complete organizational structures
for administering State projects and regulations provided by law. The
Divison of Water Resources is charged with developing the waters of
the State to the best beneficial use for citizens of Utah, considered to
be the second driest State in the Nation.32 The Utah weather modifica-
tion law, titled Cloud Seeding to Increase Precipitation, was passed by
the State legislature March 5, 1973, and became effective May 8, 1973.
In part, the law states :
The State of Utah through the Division of Water Resources shall be the only
entity, private or public, that shall have authority to authorize, sponsor, and/or
develop cloud seeding research, evaluation, or implementation projects to alter
precipitation, cloud form, or meteorological parameter within the State of Utah,
except cloud seeding for suppression of fog is excluded. The Division of Water
Resources shall authorize, sponsor, and/or develop local or statewide cloud seed-
ing projects that conform to overall State water planning objectives which are
determined to be feasible by the Division of Water Resources. ... A cloud seeding
project as used in this act shall be a planned project to evaluate meteorological
conditions, perform cloud seedings, and evaluate results.33
As designated by this law, the Division of Water Resources is the
State agency responsible for regulation and sponsorship of weather
modification projects. A Board of Water Resources has approved a
set of rules and regulations which stipulate requirements for licensing
of operations and obtaining permits on specific projects.34 These rules
are included in appendix M.
30 Butler, Vern D., "Report of weather modification activities in South Dakota" (part of
report of area No. 5 — North Central States). North American Interstate Weat' er Modifica-
tion Council, business meeting, Dec. 2-3, 1976. In NAIWMC publication No. 77-1. Septem-
ber 1977. p. 78.
31 Butler, Vern D., private communication.
32 Summers. Paul C. Utah cloud seeding program, briefing before the U.S. Department of
Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board, Sept. 24, 1977.
33 Utah Code Annotated No. 73-15-3. Cloud seeding to increase precipitation — control of
division of water resources — powers and authority of division — "cloud seeding" and
"cloud-seeding project" defined. (The Utnh weather modification law is included in its en-
tirety along with similar laws of other States in app. D, p. 612.)
34 State of Utah, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources, "Rules,
Regulations, and Procedures Relating to the Utah Cloud Seeding Act of 1973" (Laws of
Utah, ch. 193), March 1976, 13 pp.
34-857 O - 79 - 27
382
The State's cloud seeding program is administered by a small stall'
in the -Division of Water Resources, augmented by two advisory
groups of experts. The Program Advisory Committee (PAC) includes
representatives from State, Federal, and local agencies, such as the
Forest Service, the National Park Service, State Lands, and local user
groups who have either a direct or indirect interest in the program.
The Technical Advisory Group (TAG) is composed of meteorologists
from the National Weather Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, tho
University of Utah, and Utah State University as well as statisticians
from the Soil Conservation Service and the University of Utah.35
The operational cloud-seeding program in Utah is organized on a
State-county basis, where costs are shared between the State and the
counties or other political subdivisions. The cost sharing ratio is ap-
proximately 60 percent State to 40 percent local. From 1973 through
1975, before State funds were available, a group of counties in the
southern part of the State, an area of somewhat constant drought,
contracted for seeding winter clouds to increase mountain snowpack.
In 1975 the legislature appropriated State funds, however, which per-
mitted expansion of seeding operations to 1-1 southern counties, cover-
ing about 60 percent of the land area of the State. That same year
three northern counties joined three southern counties in Idaho, ini-
tiating a project for rain enhancement and hail suppression that has
been conducted during the summers of 1976 and 1977. The severe
drought conditions of the past year led to increased interest from local
officials and increased funding from the State legislature, so that
projects were conducted in all but three of the State's 29 counties
during 197T.36
The Utah program also supports weather modification research.
State funds have been earmarked for research activities as well as for
evaluation and environmental monitoring. In particular, weather mod-
ification research at the Utah Water Research Laboratory, formerly
supported by the Bureau of Reclamation, is now funded by the State,
since Federal "Sky water" funds have not been available in recent years.
The State has officially agreed to support the proposed plan of the
Bureau of Reclamation to augment water supplies in the Colorado
River through cloud seeding in the major watersheds in the river
basin. The Division of Water Resources recently concluded an agree-
ment with the Bureau to begin preliminary project design in the Uinta
Mountains of eastern Utah in preparation for this project.37
WASHINGTON
Under the weather modification law of the State of Washington 38
the Department of Ecology is charged with responsibility for super-
vision and control of all weather modification activities conducted
within the State. The department also represents the State in all inter-
state contacts relating to weather modification. In accordance with
regulations promulgated by the State to implement the administra-
tion of the law, the Department of Ecology carries out the State's
program of regulation which requires the issuing of licenses and per-
mits, the payment of fees, and the reporting of activities. These regu-
lations, reproduced in appendix M, apply to all weather modification
•« Summers, "Utah Cloud Seeding Program," 1977.
38 Ibid.
37 Ibid.
28 RCW 43.37.010 through 910. See app. D for the text of the Washington law, p. 613.
383
activities in all parts of the State except as specifically exempted.39
Activities which are exempted from licensing, permit, and liability
requirements include the following:
1. All research and experiments related to weather modfication
and control conducted within laboratories;
2. Those weather modification operations designed to alleviate
sudden, unexpected, hazardous conditions which require expe-
ditious localized action for:
a. Protection against fire,
b. Prevention of frost,
c. Dispersal of fog ; and
3. Field research and development by institutions of higher
learning.40
Persons intending to conduct activities under the second exemption
above are required to make "every reasonable effort" prior to the
operations to notify the Department of Ecology of the proposed action
and to provide certain information on operations to be conducted.
Persons planning to conduct field research under the third exemption
above must provide information on their proposed project in writing
to the department 10 days prior to commencement of activities and
must report periodically on the status of the project.41
Licensing is required for each individual or organization planning
to conduct nonexempted operations, and qualifications for such a li-
cense include the requirement for responsible individuals to be certified
professional members of the American Meteorological Society or to
possess academic achievements and professional experience necessary
to receive such certification. Permits are required for each operation
not exempted, and applicants for such permits must publish notice of
intention to conduct weather modification operations in a legal news-
paper having general circulation in the county or counties in which
the affected area is located. The permittee is required to maintain daily
reports on operations and to submit bimonthly reports to the Depart-
ment of Ecology. Proof of financial responsibility must also be pro-
vided to the department.42
Normally the State of Washington does not finance weather mod-
ification operations; however, the severe drought conditions in late
1976 led the State legislature, upon the recommendation of the Senate
Committee on Agriculture, to pass an emergency cloud-seeding bill
on February 18, 1977. This act authorized the Department of Natural
Resources to enter into a contract with the University of Washington's
Cloud Physics Group to conduct emergency cloud seeding.43 The con-
tract required the university to carry out a program of weather modi-
fication, using aircraft, in an attempt to increase snowpack in the Cas-
cade Mountains and to augment precipitation in critical areas of east-
ern Washington, although highest priority and maximum effort were
given to the Cascade Mountain work following subsequent direction
from the Department of Natural Resources.44
All of the seeding in this program was done from aircraft in order
39 Ch. 173-495 WAC. weather modification, adopted Dec. 28, 1977.
« Ibid., WAC 173-495-040.
« Ibid.
J2 Ibid.
43 Additional weather modification projects were carried out by public utility companies
and private organizations under the general authorization of this act ; two of these projects
are discussed briefly below.
" Hobbs, Peter V., "The State of Washington's Emergency Cloud Seeding Program (Feb-
ruary-June 1977)." University of Washington, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, Cloud
Physics Group, Seattle, July 1977, pp. 1-3.
384
to eliminate uncertainties from ground-based seeding. Crushed dry ice
was dispensed over the Cascades, but the warm clouds in eastern Wash-
ington were to be seeded with ammonium nitrate had that portion of
the program not been curtailed. Since the State's emergency cloud
seeding program was an operational program and not experimental,
it was not designed nor operated in a way that could provide a sci-
entific evaluation of the seeding effects. A scientist aboard each flight
assessed the potential for seeding and decided upon the optimum flight
route and rate of dispersal for seeding material. Wherever possible,
effects of seeding were documented through visual observation, pho-
tography, or direct measurements. It was apparent, in spite of the
limitations imposed on evaluation, that "significant modifications to
cloud structures and increases in precipitation-sized particles were
produced by the cloud seeding. It is likely that these modifications pro-
duced increases in precipitation on the ground, although this cannot
be proved scientifically from the data collected in this operational
program." 45
Hobbs has proposed that a demonstration cloud-seeding project for
the State of Washington be designed and implemented, using both
physical and statistical criteria to determine the effects of seeding.
Such a project is currently under consideration by the Washington
State Depart ment of Commerce and Economic Development and
would be conducted by the University of Washington.46
Two other projects conducted during the 1977 drought by a commer-
cial operator under contract may be noted. In one case farmers in Gar-
field and Columbia Counties in eastern Washington formed a local
association, collected a 10-cent per acre assessment, and deposited the
funds with the State Department of Natural Kesources, who con-
tracted on their behalf for the requested services. Non-randomized
weather modification operations were conducted in May and June of
1977, using a cloud-seeding aircraft and a weather radar system in-
stalled at Pomeroy, Washington. Based on preliminary analysis of
precipitation data from National Weather Service stations and from
other local stations in the target and control areas, a 15 to 20 percent
increase in rainfall from seeded storms was suggested.47
The other operational program, conducted by the same contractor,
was initiated by the Tacoma City Light and Power Company, as a
possible means of enhancing water supplies from the Cowlitz and Nis-
qually watersheds in southwestern Washington. Funding was passed
from the company to the State Department of Natural Resources,
which contracted for the seeding in March 1977, and operations were
carried out from late March through June, using an aircraft and a
weather radar system for support, Preliminary analysis, based on com-
parisons of precipitation data from the control and target areas, again
suggested rainfall increases of 15 to 20 percent from the seeded
storms.48
45 Ibid., p. 5. 9. and 23.
"Ibid., pp. 26-27.
47 Henderson, Thomas J., "The Eastern Washington Cloud Seeding Program, a summary
of cloud seeding activities conducted over portions of Garfield and Columbia Counties in
Washington during the period May 18, 1077 through June 30, 1077." Atmospherics, Inc.,
report prepared for the Department of Natural Resources, State of Washington, Fresno,
Calif July 20. 1077. pp. 2. 3, and 21.
48 Henderson, Thomas J., "The Cowlitz-Nisqually Cloud Seeding Program, a summary
of cloud seeding activities conducted over the Cowlitz-Nisqually Drainage In Washington
during the period March 25, 1077 through June 30, 1077." Atmospherics, Inc., report pre-
pared for the Department of Natural Resources, State of Washington, Fresno, California,
July 26, 1077, pp. 2 and 17.
CHAPTER 8
PRIVATE ACTIVITIES IN WEATHER MODIFICATION
(By Robert E. Morrison, Specialist in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research
Division, Congressional Research Service)
Introduction
Two previous chapters reviewed, respectively, the weather modifica-
tion activities and interests of the Federal Government and of State
and local jurisdictions. Many of the operational services performed
for agencies in these governmental bodies and for private sponsors,
have been carried out under contract by commercial firms who have
developed expertise in a broad range of weather modification capa-
bilities or who specialize in particular services essential to both re-
search and operational projects. A summary of the kinds of activities
performed by these companies is contained in this chapter. Other pri-
vate organizations — such as cooperative associations of farmers and
orchardists, utilities, airlines, and lumber companies — are among
the sponsors and organizers of operational weather modification proj-
ects. Some of these privately sponsored projects have been discussed
in several sections of the previous chapter under activities conducted
within and under the regulation of the States.
While the majority of universities whose atmospheric science and
other departments have participated significantly in weather modifi-
cation research projects are public institutions, mostly in the Western
States, a few private universities and research foundations have also
contributed to the understanding of weather modification through
their research activities. Since the efforts of universities are so closely
tied to the discussions on the status of the technology and needed re-
search, Federal and State activities, and other particular aspects of the
subject addressed in later chapters, activities of academic institutions
are not discussed separately.
Important among the private institutions concerned with weather
modification are the professional organizations of which research and
operational weather modifiers and other interested meteorologists are
members. These include the American Meteorological Society, the
Weather Modification Association, and the Irrigation and Drainage
Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers. In addition, the
North American Interstate Weather Modification Council (discussed
in the previous chapter) is an organization whose membership consists
of governments of U.S. States and Canadian Provinces and the gov-
ernment of Mexico, which serves as a forum for interstate coordi-
nation and exchange of information on weather modification. Two pro-
fessional organizations, the Weather Modification Association and the
American Meteorological Society, will be discussed in this chapter.
(385)
386
Weather modification is controversial, and both formal and in-
formal opposition groups have developed in various sections of the
country. Reasons for such opposition are varied and are based on both
real and perceived adverse consequences from weather modification.
Some of the objections often voiced by private groups and some ex-
amples of formal opposition groups are reviewed in this chapter.
Commercial Weather Modifiers
scope and significance of contract activities
Weather modification operations, which now cover a significant area
of the United States, are almost exclusively conducted on a contract
basis for specific users by professional cloud seeding organizations.
Contracts often cover only one season of the year; however, a large
number of such projects are renewed annually. Target areas range
from a few hundred to a few thousand square miles. In 1976, 6 of 10
major companies having substantial numbers of contracts received
about $2.7 million in contract awards for operations within the United
States. In addition, a few of these companies also had overseas con-
tracts.1 Owing to the increased demand for emergency programs dur-
ing the recent drought, it is estimated that 1977 contracts totaled about
$3.5 million. Most weather modification operational activities are
carried out in the region of the country from the Great Plains west-
ward, though some projects do occur from time to time in Eastern
States as well. The distribution of these projects is shown in figure 2
in the previous chapter; and statistics on commercial operators and
projects in which they provide services are contained in tables in that
chapter.2
The initial role of the private weather modification operators was
to sustain weather modification activity during its early years. During
that period there was heated scientific controversy with other pro-
fessional meteorologists on the efficacy of cloud seeding. Later, their
operations provided a valuable data base which permitted the early
evaluation of seeding efforts and estimation of the potential prospects
for the technology, especially by several select committees assembled
for such assessment within the Federal Government.3 Meanwhile,
commercial operators, who decreased in number after the initial surge
of the early 1950 era, have grown in competence and in public respect.
Their operations have incorporated the benefits of accumulated experi-
ence and research findings. Today, more often that not, they work
hand in hand with researchers in weather modification, and, in fact,
they often participate in research projects, contributing much of their
know-how acquired through their unique experiences.
SUMMARY OF CONTRACT SERVICES
The first scientific weather modification activities were conducted by
the private sector. In an earlier chapter Ave noted the now famous
pioneering work of Schaefer, Langmuir, and Vonnegut — all with the
General Electric Co. — in the mid- to late 1940's.4 After the early
1 Elliott Robert D., private communication, I >ecember 1977.
2 See ch. 7, pp. 345 and 347.
Elliott, private communication, l!>77.
* See ch. 2, p. 37.
387
General Electric discoveries, the first early cloud seeding was initiated
by crop dusters, operating on their own behalf or in service to farm
groups.5 In addition to providing some extra water and accumulating
information on seeding effects, these private projects provided testing
for various seeding modes and for different operational schemes.6
Since the early 1950's cloud-seeding activities have been carried on
at a moderately uniform level following the initial flurry of activities
immediately after the General Electric discoveries. Excluding fog
clearing (which is customarily not performed in the context of weather
modification but rather as part of other airport operations), the an-
nual number of private weather modification projects has been about
30, mostly concentrating in rain or snowpack enhancement.7 The num-
ber of such projects and the number of operators were 47 and 15,
respectively, during calendar year 1975, according to the records of
the Xational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).8
(The NO A A statistics include operations in fog dispersal at airports.)
Many of the operations discussed earlier and summarized in tables and
figures on U.S. weather modification activities for 1975 and 1976 in-
clude operations that have either been conducted or sponsored by pri-
vate concerns.9
During the 1950's and 1960's these projects were conducted for the
most part by five major companies though a larger number were in-
volved during the early 1950's. Developing in the 1960's and moving
into the 1970's a number of operators, inclined to depend mostly on
aircraft seeding, began summer cumulus seeding in the northern Great
Plains. Their emphasis has been primarily on increasing rainfall and
suppressing hail, and their principal sponsors have been farm groups.10
Since the 1950's there have been conducted, on an annual basis, be-
tween six and nine operational projects intended to increase precipita-
tion in watersheds in the West, sponsored by utility companies. A num-
ber of these projects were continued over an extended period of years.
The Southern California Edison project, for example, in the upper
San Joaquin River basin in the Sierra Xevada Mountains has been in
operation continuously every winter since the 1950-51 season.11 Such
utility company projects tend to run for a number of successive years
when demand exceeds power resources; after new generating plants
with full reservoirs become operational, cloud seeding is often cur-
tailed until again required by increased power demands.
There has also been some interest in cloud seeding on the part of
the Western lumber industry, when drought conditions reduce fuel
moisture indices and increase the attendant potential for forest fires.
Enhancement of precipitation from summer cumulus clouds, through
contracts with weather modification operators, has been employed to
increase moisture and, on occasions, to assist in limiting or extinguish-
ing fires.12
5 Elliott, Robert D.. "Experience of the Private Sector," in Wilmot N. Hess (editor),
'Weather and Climate Modification," New York, Wiley, 1974, p. 46.
6 Ibid.
' IMd.
8 Charak. Mason T., "Weather Modification Activity Reports : Calendar Year 1975," Na-
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Environmental Monitoring and
Prediction. Rockvillp. Md.. June 1976, p. 4.
9 See ch. 7, p. 343 ff, and see app. G.
10 Elliott. 1974, "Experience of the Private Sector." 1974, pp. 47-48.
11 Ibid., p. 48.
12 Ibid.
388
Under the guidance of the airlines, the use of weather modification
to clear airport fog was initiated as an operational procedure during
the 19'60's. Since the current operational procedures apply almost
exclusively to cold fogs, airports in more northerly or higher altitude
locations in the United States are the ones which can benefit from this
technology. Each winter, there are about 15 projects underway
throughout the country. The seeding flights are usually conducted by
local operators under contract to the airlines. Low-flying aircraft
usually seed with crushed dry ice, which is dropped into the fog.13 In
1975 there were nine cold fog and one warm fog dispersal projects
conducted at U.S. airports under contract to airlines.14
The principal U.S. commercial weather modification operators are
also involved in contract services in other parts of the world. In par-
ticular, such projects have been conducted in Canada, in Central and
South America, in Africa, in the Near East, and in Europe.15
EVALUATION AND RESEARCH BY COMMERCIAL FIRMS
Commercial weather modification firms, under contract to private
organizations or local jurisdictions, are expected to develop additional
water resources or to modify effects of damaging storms in order to
alleviate immediate or impending economic and personal losses
brought on by drought or other severe weather. They are therefore
usually obliged to expend most if not all of their efforts and support-
ing funds in attempting to mitigate these extreme conditions and to
attend less to scientific evaluation of their activities than would be true
in a carefully designed experimental or demonstration project.
The private sector has contributed to evaluation, however. It has
pioneered in evaluation of results through comparison of data from
seeding operations with historical data, using the latter as the un-
seeded samples. Using relationships based on historical precipitation
records, for example, predictions have been made of what precipitation
can be expected in the target area when seeded. There is, of course, the
possibility that historical data contain inconsistencies, so that, in a
project performed purely for research purposes, this practice is re-
placed by randomization. This kind of evaluation has also been applied
in projects designed to increase snowpack, where snow course measure-
ments, taken at monthly intervals in the West for the past 20 to 40
years, have provided the historical record.10 Statistics on annual
stream flow and on crop hail damage have also been used as criteria
for project evaluation.
The private sector of the weather modification community has also
been involved in the conduct of projects designed for pure research
purposes, when under contract to provide a variety of professional
services in connection with projects. A series of such experiments have
been carried out, for example, in the vicinity of Santa Barbara, Calif.
The first Santa Barbara randomized seeding project (1957-60) in-
volved one major private contractor. North American Weather Con-
sultants, along with a number of State and local agencies from Cali-
fornia and some agencies of the Federal Government. The second
« It.ld.. pp. 4S-49.
m Xo<> tallies 6 and 7. ch. 7, and also see app. G.
« Elliott, "Experience of the Private Sector." 1974. p. 49.
10 Ibid., p. 60.
389
Santa Barbara randomized seeding experiment (1967-70) was con-
ducted by North American Weather Consultants under contract to
the Naval Weapons Center at China Lake, Calif. Also, during the
1970?s, a randomized seeding project was sponsored by the Pacific Gas
& Electric Co. in the Lake Almanor drainage basin of the Sierra
Nevada.17 There are other examples where users have conducted ran-
domized projects for a number of years in order to "calibrate'' their
watersheds and cloud types.
PARTICIPATION IN FEDERAL RESEARCH PROJECTS
A number of private firms have performed a variety of meteorologi-
cal services under contract to Federal agencies sponsoring weather
modification research projects. These companies include both those
who also provide professional weather modification services in pri-
vately or publicly financed operational projects as well as meteorologi-
cal firms who do not otherwise engage in weather modification. Al-
though most weather modification programs of the several Federal
agencies have at some time contracted with such private companies
as well as with universities, the principal sponsor of research projects
using these contractors in recent years has been the Bureau of Reclama-
tion through its atmospheric water resources management program
(Project Skywater). Some of these commercial organizations, who
have performed various services for "Skywater" are identified in
table 8 in chapter 5.18 Prior to reduction of weather modification re-
search activities in the 1970's, the Department of Defense was a major
sponsor of contracted research with industrial and academic weather
modification groups.
While a contracting firm is customarily responsible for most aspects
of an operational project if funded privately or by State or local tax
assessments, its participation in a Federal research project is more
often limited to one or a few specialized services which it can provide
especially well, based on its unique experience. Such services are usual-
ly of the operations type and include aircraft support, seeding, equip-
ment maintenance, data gathering, or other field services. Some high-
ly specialized companies assist with project design, meteorological
measurements, data analysis, and report preparation. The overall
project planning and design, project monitoring, integration of par-
ticipant responsibilities, and final evaluation are usually managed by
the responsible field personnel of the Federal agency itself, while spe-
cialized analyses, evaluations, and related studies are most often per-
formed by scientists and other experts associated with participating
universities or research organizations.
Weather Modification Organizations
professional organizations
There are three professional organizations in the United States to
one or more of which most weather modifiers and others interested in
weather modification belong and through which scientific, technical,
and legal problems and findings are aired and discusssed. In addition.
17 Ibid., p. 68.
1S See p. 250.
390
v arious other matters are addressed by these groups, including state-
ments on weather modification policy, opinions on pending legisla-
tion, social implications, and professional standards and certification.
These organizations are the Weather Modification Association, the
American Meteorological Society, and the American Society of Civil
Engineers. The first of these three is concerned exclusively with
weather modification, while the latter two represent professional in-
terests and activities across a wide range of meteorological and en-
gineering fields, respectively; however, each of the larger societies has
a committee concerned particularly with weather modification. Two
of these professional organizations are discussed below.
Weather Modification Association
Recently the following four stated purposes of the Weather Modi-
fication Association (WMA) were given in testimony : 19
1. Promotion of research, development, and understanding of
weather modification for beneficial uses ;
2. Encouraging and promoting the highest standards of con-
duct, including certification of individual members qualified to
execute field experiments and operations in weather modification ;
3. Serving as a clearinghouse and dissemination agent for
weather modification oriented literature and information ; and
4. Assuming an active role and maintaining a strong voice in
the production and dissemination of policy statements concerning
all aspects of weather modification practice.
The WMA was conceived in April 1951 at a meeting of weather
modifiers and their clients in Riverside, Calif., called to discuss pos-
sible methods of organizing and controlling weather modification
operations and evaluations in California in order to raise the stand-
ards of those engaged in cloud seeding operations. At that meeting an
organization, tentatively called "The Artificial Precipitation Opera-
tions Association," was formed; a second was held later the same
month and the name was changed to the "Weather Control Research
Association." In the following years the organization developed, its
activities increased, and its membership grew and became more repre-
sentative of other parts of the country. Its current name was adopted
in March 1967.20
Current membership in the WMA is approximately 250, including
both individuals and corporations interested in the field of weather
modification. Members are mostly from the United States ; however,
there are members from some foreign countries as well. The diverse
interests and backgrounds of the members range from concerned water
users to university professors.21
The WMA conducts semiannual business and technical meetings,
usually in the West or the Midwest, where weather modification proj-
ects are more common and where the membership is more heavily
represented. The 1977 meetings were held in April in Salt Lake City
and in October in Champaign, 111. The latter meeting was conducted
jointly with the Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent
19 Griffith, Don A.. Thomas J. Henderson. Theodore B. Smith, and Arnett S. Dennis, testi-
mony hefore the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board, Cham-
paign 111.. Oct. 13. 1977.
20 "Background of the Weather Modification Association," the Journal of Weather Modi-
fication, vol. 9, No. 1. April 1977, p. 207.
-l Griffith, et al., testimony hefore the Weather Modification Advisory Board, 1977.
391
Weather Modification of the American Meteorological Society, of
which the WMA was one of two cosponsors. The 1978 spring meeting
of the WMA is to be held in Tucson, Ariz.
Beginning in 1969, the WMA has published the Journal of Weather
Modification. While it has been the practice of the association to pro-
duce a single annual issue of the journal in most years, usually in
April, two issues were published in 1975 and 1976.22 Another recent
publication of the WMA is a brochure, which presents the basic con-
cepts of weather modification, discusses the involvement of various
levels of government, and relates some facts on the WMA itself.23
Since 1968 the WMA has officially supported the concept of develop-
ing a model law for regulation of weather modification activities at
the State and/or Federal level. A main feature of such a law would be
the establishment of a weather modification board, whose membership
would be selected mainly from the private sector, representing inter-
ests concerned with water resources as they affect agriculture and in-
dustry. The envisioned board would perform various functions such as
licensing, review, and recordkeeping. The WMA also supported the
formation of the Advisory Board on Weather Modification by the
Secretary of Commerce to conduct the study and prepare the report
required by the National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976.24
One of the purposes of the WMA is to certify individual members
who are deemed to be qualified to direct weather modification opera-
tions and/or experiments. Certification is granted only upon the
unanimously favorable vote by a certification board, which examines
each applicant in the areas of knowledge, experience, and character.
The WMA considers certification to be desirable in order to "* * *
accomplish other purposes of the association, namely, promoting re-
search and engineering advancement, encouraging and promoting the
highest standards for professional conduct, and assisting in arrang-
ing liability insurance upon application from members performing
operations or experiments." 25 As of April 1977 the WMA had cer-
tified 35 of its "members, the majority of whom are officers and/or
meteorologists with weather modification contractors ; however, others
are associated with universities or wTith various public and private
organizations. Two of the certified members are Mexican, and the re-
mainder are from the United States.26
The WMA has been considering the adoption of a statement on
standards and ethics for weather modification operators. A draft
statement, prepared by the WMA committee on standards and ethics,
was presented to the members at the 1977 fall meeting for review and
comment and will be considered for its adoption or further modifica-
tion at the 1978 spring meeting. Copies of the WMA proposed draft
statement on standards and ethics for weather modification operators,
the WMA constitution and bylaws, and the qualifications and proce-
dures for certification by the WMA are all contained in appendix N.
22 The latest available issue of The Journal of Weather Modification is vol. 10, No. 1,
April 1978. All previous issues of the journal are available from the Weather Modification
Association, P.O. Box 8116. Fresno, Calif. 93727.
23 Weather Modification Association. "Weather Modification; Some Facts About Seeding
Clouds." Fresno. Calif.. August 1977, 16 pp.
24 Griffith, et al., testimony before the Weather Modification Advisory Board, 1977,
25 Qualifications and procedures for certification bv the Weather Modification Association,
the .lo-irnal of Weather Modification, vol. 9, No. 1, April 1977, p. 202.
26 "Weather Modification Association : Certified Members," the Journal of Weather Modi-
fication, vol. 9, No. 1, April 1977, p. 208.
392
In July 1977, the Chairman of the U.S. Department of Commerce
Weather Modification Advisory Board invited the officers of the
WMA to provide testimony on the purposes and activities of the as-
sociation. A series of questions was also forwarded to the WMA, ask-
ing that responses be provided to the Board when its officers appeared
at its October meeting. The responses to these questions, prepared by
the executive committee of the WMA, serve to provide an insight into
the current position of the WMA on weather modification policy is-
sues. The questions from the Weather Modification Board and the
WMA responses follow : 27
A. What should be the role of the Federal Government in support-
ing emergency operations? In supporting long-term location projects?
What should the State role be?
1. What should the role of the Federal Government be in support-
ing emergency operations?
The WMA has had a rather longstanding policy statement relevant
to this subject. The statement was originally prepared a few years ago
when drought conditions in the Midwest began to seriously impact on
the agricultural community. In general, this WMA position dealt with
the feasibility of cloud seeding programs during drought conditions,
the preferred choice of operational capabilities, and the availability of
equipment and professional personnel. The following points sum-
marize the WMA position :
Cloud seeding should not be considered a panacea for drought relief
although the technology may produce some economic benefit if the
programs are properly designed and conducted during drought
periods.
Cloud seeding should be considered one of many water resources
management tools available for use when meteorological conditions
indicate a reasonable potential for beneficial results.
The Federal Government should support emergency operations
through a close interface with individual State agencies. However,
there needs to be a strong recognition that seedable clouds are probably
scarce during drought periods and opportunities may be minimal.
The extensive field experience within the private sector should be
called upon to provide a strong operational input to these emergency
operations if it is finally decided that such programs have a reasonable
chance of producing a beneficial result.
Because of the Federal Government's historic role in weather modifi-
cation research, the appropriate Government agencies should provide
backup capability to these programs in the form of monitor and
evaluation systems. If the Federal Government is to accept respon-
sibility for initiating emergency programs, it must also accept respon-
sibility for potential damage liability covering the results.
2. In support of long-term local projects?
Here again, the WMA has developed over the years some specific
position papers with respect to long-term local programs. Some of the
primary points are: The WMA supports Federal Government inputs
to local long-term programs, particularly if these inputs are research
oriented and are designed to provide information which can improve
future operations plus assist in the careful evaluation of results.
What should the State role be?
27 Griffith, et al., testimony before the Weather Modification Advisory Board, 1977.
393
The WMA supports a strong State role in weather modification.
Where States have demonstrated a reasonable willingness to organize
and administer weather modification activities, the Federal Govern-
ment should encourage and assist these programs, particularly in the
areas of research, monitoring, and evaluations.
States should develop statutes which address licensing and permit
requirements. There is a high priority requirement for strong adminis-
tration of these statutes through a set of rational rules and regulations.
The States should be responsive to cooperative Federal Government
assistance in the form of research activities and should make their pro-
grams available to such "piggy back" activities.
B. Are Federal regulations, permits, licensing, and so forth, desir-
able?
1. Federal regulations are presently limited to reporting of weather
modification activities including times, amounts, locations, and pur-
poses. These activities have been valuable and have apparently not
placed undue burden on most operators. These reporting activities
should be continued with due consideration being given to a consolida-
tion or uniformity of State and Federal reporting requirements to
eliminate unnecessary duplication. No other Federal regulations are
considered to be necessary at this time.
2. Permits to operate are considered to be essential in order to have
a mechanism for resolving potential conflicts in local interests. Because
of the urgent need to respond effectively to these local problems it is
considered necessary that the permits be granted at a State level.
Federal permits do not appear to be a viable solution.
3. Licenses, as well as permits, are granted by a number of States.
The license has the role of passing judgment on the operator, while
the permit is granted on a project basis. The requirements for licensing
are generally very loose in keeping with our limited ability to define
the caliber of the operator in definitive terms. The mechanism for
examining the qualifications of operators, however, exists in a number
of States and can be utilized to screen out the incompetent operators,
if needed. As our ability to evaluate operators becomes more definitive,
the machinery exists to become increasingly demanding of the appli-
cants' qualifications. The licensing function is intimately associated
with the permit process and should stay at the State level for the
present.
4. A principal argument for Federal permits and/or licensing
relates to interstate transport of seeding material and potential extra
area effects. The few cases of this type which have arisen have been
handled on a case basis. At such time as the regular seeding operations
become more widespread and when the evidence of downwind effects
becomes better documented, the need for the Federal licensing or
permit process may become apparent. For the time being, it is the
opinion of the WMA that the process should be left in State hands but
be made more uniform so as to include separate licensing and permit
functions.
5. The concept of an independent, licensed designer for each project
was vigorously opposed by a number of WMA members. These mem-
bers felt that the required expertise for the proper design of a specific
program frequently rested within one individual group by reason of
394
experience or background. An independent designer, called in from
the outside, could not be expected to know the specific meteorology
and terrain of each area as well as those already experienced in the
area or in similar storm types. There was no objection expressed by
this group to the concept of a licensed group or individual within the
group being required for project design. The concept of an independent
designer with infinite wisdom for a variety of projects, however, was
st rongly re j ect ed .
A further consideration is the damage that such a concept would
have to the opportunities for growth in technical competence for the
private weather modification operator. Importation of the outside
designer would severely restrict the operator from developing the in-
ternal technical stature and strength so vital for the development of
competency in the field.
C. Are there established professional standards for weather modi-
fiers? Does the WMA have an active ethics review process?
Although there are no established standards for weather modifiers,
this matter has received considerable attention within the WMA. At
the 1977 spring meeting an ad hoc Committee on Standards and Ethics
was established. Two meetings of the committee with some correspond-
ence in the interim resulted in a draft statement which was submitted
to the membership at the 1977 fall meeting on October 10. The draft
was referred back to the ad hoc committee and is expected to come up
again at the 1978 spring meeting. The code of ethics contained in the
proposed statement covers relationships between WMA members and
governmental agencies, the general public, clients, and other members
of the meteorological profession. While there has been no active ethics
review process so far, it is expected that such a process will be activated
following adoption of a code. The proposed statement also sets forth
standards for individual projects, covering such points as staffing,
public disclosure of methods, and the need for evaluation.
For the last several years, the WMA has sought to improve profes-
sional standards by a certification program. It is hoped that this cer-
tification program will be strengthend by the adoption of a code of
ethics and a statement of requirements for individual projects.
D. Is communication between, weather modification pperators and
scientsts a problem? If so, how can it be improved?
The WMA has provided an effective channel for communications
between weather modification operators and scientists. These individ-
uals come from diverse backgrounds. In addition to twice yearly meet-
ings, the WMA publishes an annual Journal of Weather Modification
which receives widespread distribution.
Communications between operators and scientists could, of course,
be improved. The need for improved communications is due in part
to the expansion of weather modification operations and the recent
increased awareness of man's impact on his environment.
Other means of communications available (outside of the WMA)
include the scientific literature, scientific conferences, personal contact,
and the publication of informational pamphlets and policy statements.
Interdiscipline conferences on weather modification should be en-
couraged. Scienl ists should be directly exposed to field programs when-
ever possible to gain firsthand knowledge of the modification tech-
395
niques employed and the problems encountered by the weather modi-
fication operators.
American Meteorological- Society
The stated purposes of the American Meteorological Society (AMS)
are : The development and dissemination of knowledge of meteorology
in all its phases and applications, and the advancement of its profes-
sional ideals. The society shall be a nonprofit organization and none of
its net income or net worth shall inure to the benefit of its members. In
event of dissolution, any property belonging to the society shall be
donated to some organization or organizations of a similar purpose
and character, and in no event shall any of such property be distributed
to members of the society.28
Members of the AMS number about 900 and include meteorologists
and other scientists whose interests and activities cover the complete
range of atmospheric sciences and services, well beyond the scope of
weather modification. The organization of the AMS was recently re-
viewed in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society.29 Con-
siderable attention has been given to weather modification within the
AMS, however, and a number of its members are or have been partici-
pants in research and operational aspects of the field. While some
AMS members are engaged full-time in weather modification activi-
ties others are partly or intermittently involved, depending upon their
current interest, research funding, or particular management respon-
sibilities.
The AMS took an early interest in weather modification when it
was urged by the Director of the Weather Bureau to look into what
were considered extravagant claims of Langmuir on the effects of his
cloud seeding operations.30 Accordingly, the AMS issued its first pol-
icy statement on weather modification, which was somewhat conserva-
tive in tenor, and. without refuting Langmuirs claims directly, stated
that it was not yet proven that cloud seeding could produce econom-
ically significant amounts of rain.31
The AMS provides a means for exchange of ideas and findings, par-
ticularly in the research aspects of weather modification, through its
journals and other publications, through professional meetings, and
through the deliberations within its committees and governing bodies.
The society has a Committee on Weather Modification, established in
1968, which is quite active and has from time to time produced public
statements on the state of the art of weather modification. Some of
these have been adopted by the council of the AMS, the most recent
one in January 1973. (Policy statements of the AMS may not neces-
sarily coincide with those of its subordinate committees, such as the
one on weather modification.) The 1973 AMS policy statement is re-
produced in appendix O ; it summarizes the status of planned weather
modification, inadvertent weather modification, public issues, and rec-
ommendations for further activities, noting that changes which had
28 Constitution and bylaws of the American Meteorological Society, art. II. Bulletin of
the American Meteorological Society, vol. 58. No. 8. August 1977. p. 721.
29 "Organization of the American Meteorological Society," Bulletin of the American Mete-
orological Society, vol. 57, No. 8, August 1976, pp. 900-907.
30 See the history of weather modification, discussed in ch. 2, for the background of this
controversy.
31 Elliott, "Experience of the Private Sector." 1974, pp. 84-85.
396
occurred since the previous 1967 statement had dictated such an up-
date.32. Since the official AMS position of the society is that all policy
statements are valid only for 3 years after issue, there is technically no
official AMS statement on weather modification. The 1973 statement is
currently being reevaluated and revised; however, no major changes
are contemplated.33
The frame of reference for the AMS committee on weather modi-
fication follows :
Established in 1968 to promote and guide the society's contributions
to the increasingly important field of weather modification, this com-
mittee is responsible for keeping abreast of one of the more challenging
and promising interfaces between meteorology and society. The func-
tions of this committee are the following :
1. To serve as the official arm to relate the society to the large seg-
ments of the public who are affected by, interested in, or concerned
about weather modification.
2. To develop and update official policy statements on weather modi-
fication as may be needed by the society.
3. To plan and oversee the society's major meetings and conferences
on weather modification.
4. To provide a platform for atmospheric scientists and other spe-
cialists to discuss the results of their research and to develop general
guidelines for future research in weather modification.
5. To advise the society of current activities, trends, and prospects
for weather modification by means of an annual report to the society's
Scientific and Technological Activities Commission.
6. To promote advancement in the broader aspects of weather modi-
fication including: (a) the societal utilization, planning, and manage-
ment of weather modification ; (b) experimental design and evaluation,
simulation, and prediction, and modification technology; (c) tech-
nological mitigation of weather hazards; and (d) the use of land
and energy resources to achieve more desirable responses in weather
and climate.34
The AMS committee on weather modification has been instrumen-
tal in planning and conducting a series of AMS national weather
modification conferences. The first of six such conferences was held in
1968 at the State University of New York at Albany.35 The first con-
ference was part of a call for an assessment of the technical status of
weather and climate modification and stemmed from a recommenda-
tion received by the AMS from the Interdepartmental Conference on
Weather Modification, the annual meeting of representatives of Fed-
eral Government agencies engaged in weather modification.30' 37
The second, third, and fourth AMS conferences on weather modifica-
tion were held, respectively, in Santa Barbara, Calif., in April 1970;
32 Policv statement of the American Meteorological Society on purposeful and Inadver-
tent modification of weather and climate. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society,
vol 54, No. 7. July 1973. pp. 694-695. (Adopted hy the AMS Council. January 2S, 1973 )
33 Ban m, Werner A. (President of the American Meteorological Society). In testimony
hefore the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification Advisory Board. Cham-
pa'gn. 111., October 14. 1977.
34 Frames of reference for scientific and technological activities committees. Bulletin of
the American Meteorological Society, vol. T)5, No. 8, August 1974, p. 1011.
KAmericnn Meteorological Society, "Proceedings of the First National Conference on
Weather Modication," Apr. 28-May 1. 196S. Albany, N.Y., Boston, 1968, 532 pp.
36 Ibid., p. i.
37 See section on coordination of Federal weather modification activities, ch. 5, p. 223.
397
in Rapid City, S. Dak., in June 1972; and in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., in
November 1974.38- 39' 40 The third conference, at Rapid City, was co-
sponsored by the irrigation and drainage division of the American
Society of Civil Engineers.
The fifth AMS conference was coincident with the Second Confer-
ence on Weather Modification, sponsored by the World Meteorological
Organization (WMO) during August 1976 in Boulder, Colo.41 The
AMS was a cosponsor of this conference along with the International
Association of Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics (IAMAP) of
the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics.
The sixth AMS conference, held in Champaign, 111., in October 1977,
was cosponsored by the American Society of Civil Engineers and the
Weather Modification Association.42 This was the first conference in
which a significant number of papers on inadvertent weather modifica-
tion were presented, and the title of the conference reflected this new
emphasis. The sixth AMS conference was also the occasion for two
other related weather modification meetings, also held in Champaign,
during and after the AMS meeting. The Weather Modification Asso-
ciation, a cosponsor of the technical conference, conducted its regular
fall business meeting; and the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather
Modification Advisory Board conducted its fifth meeting, during
which testimony was provided to the board from various groups, par-
ticularly officers of professional organizations concerned with weather
modification.
Because of the particular division of interests within the AMS, one
major aspect of weather modification, the suppression of hurricanes
and other severe tropical storms, has not been a concern of the Com-
mittee on Weather Modification, nor have papers on this subject gener-
ally been presented at the AMS weather modification conferences.
Modification of such storms has been considered as one part of the
overall subject of tropical meteorology and has, therefore, received the
attention of another AMS committee, the Committee on Hurricanes
and Tropical Meteorology. That committee has been responsible for
planning and sponsoring a number of technical conferences on hurri-
canes and tropical meteorology, at which papers on hurricane modifica-
tion are customarily given. There is also an overlap between the func-
tions of the Committee on Weather Modification and the Committee on
Cloud Physics. AMS conferences are sponsored in both subject areas;
the more applied papers tend to be given at the weather modification
conferences, while those on more basic cloud research are presented at
cloud physics conferences. The distinction is sometimes blurred, how-
ever, so that many papers can easily fall into either category.
At least seven periodicals are published by the AMS. While there
is not a single journal devoted to weather modification, papers on the
3S American Meteorological Society. "Second National Conference on Weather Modifica-
tion" (preprints). April 6-9. 1970. Santa Barbara. Calif., Boston. 3 970. 440 pp.
39 American Meteorological Society. "Third Conference on Weather Modification" (pre-
prints). June 26-29, 1972. Rapid City. S. Dak.. Boston, 1972, 336 pp.
40 American Meteorological Society. "Fourth Conference on Weather Modification" (pre-
prints), Noy. 18-21, 1974. Fort Lauderdale, Fla., Boston, 1974, 575 pp.
41 World Meteorological Organization, papers presented at the Second WMO Conference
on Weather Modification, Aug. 2-6. 1976. Boulder, Colo. Secretariat of the World Meteoro-
logical Organization. Geneva, Switzerland. 1976.
42 American Meteorological Society. "Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent
Weather Modification," Oct. 10-13, 1977, Champaign, 111., Boston, 396 pp.
34-857 O - 79 - 28
398
subject most often appear in the Bulletin of the American Meteor-
ological Society and in the Journal of Applied Meteorology ; articles
of a survey nature appear in the former, and more technical contribu-
tions are found in the latter. Pertinent papers are also cited in the AMS
Meteorological and Geoastrophysical Abstracts. Among the many
publications of the AMS is a glossary of weather modification terms.43
In 1973 a group of scientists at the University of Washington, in
consultation with a number of experts from other organizations, con-
ducted a study and prepared a report, intending to clarify some policy
issues relating to weather modification.44 The AMS took the initiative
in publishing this report and distributing it to a large number of State
and Federal Government officials.
Members of the AMS may become certified consulting meterologists,
upon meeting qualifications in the areas of knowledge, experience, and
character, as determined by an AMS board of certified consulting
meteorologists. Such certification is a formal recognition that the
applicant is well qualified to carry on the work of a consulting meteor-
ologist. The fivefold purpose of certification is stated as follows :
(1) To foster the establishment and maintenance of a high level of
professional competency, and mature and ethical counsel, in the field
of consulting meteorology.
(2) To provide a basis on which a client seeking assistance on
problems of a meteorological nature may be assured of mature, com-
petent, and ethical professional counsel.
(3) To provide incentive for the continued professional growth of
the meteorologist after completion of his academic training.
(4) To enhance the prestige, authority, success, and emoluments of
consulting meteorology specifically, and of professional meteorology
generally, by encouraging such a consistently high order of profes-
sional activity that unqualified practitioners will either labor to
achieve this recognition or retire from the field.
(5) To provide a guide for eventual licensing of consulting mete-
orologists by State governments.45
As of August 1977 there were 169 certified meteorologists in the
AMS. While these certified consulting meteorologists are involved in
a large variety of public-oriented professional services, this certifica-
tion would also be applicable for some who are engaged in weather
modification, although the certification discussed in the previous sec-
tion on the Weather Modification Association applies more directly
to such professional services. A few meteorologists are certified by
both the AMS and the WMA.
Recently the president of the AMS. Dr. Werner A. Baum. and the
chairman of its Committee on Weather Modification, Dr. Bernard A.
Silverman, testified before the U.S. Commerce Department's Weather
Modification Advisory Board and answered questions from the Board
on weather modification positions of the AMS. Dr. Baum expressed
43 American Meteorological Society, "Glossary of Terms Frequently Used in Weather
Modification," Boston. 1968. 59 pp.' (This glossary was prepared initially by the AMS
for use in the Second Seminar for Science Writers on Weather Modification, New York
City. Apr. 25. 1908. sponsored by the AMS anrl the National Association of Science Writers.)
** Fleagle, Rohprt G.. James A. Crutchfield. Ralph W. Johnson, and Mohamed F. Ahdo,
"Weather Modification in the Public Interest." Seattle, American Meteorological Society
and the University of Washington Press. 1974. 88 pp.
45 Certification Program for Consulting Meteorologists, bulletin of the American Meteoro-
logical Society, vol. 58, No. 8, August 1977, p. 798.
399
his opinion that weather modification needs a major research effort
and that its future is bright in view of its potential for benefiting
humanity. He felt that the Federal Government ought to take a more
dominant role, since the various State actions have been taken with
little uniformity, but urged that the functions of regulation and
operation be separated in any Federal organizational structure.46
Dr. Silverman discussed in detail the areas of atmospheric research
which the AMS Committee on Weather Modification has identified as
significant for the progress of weather modification. These included
cloud physics, precipitation forecasting, cloud climatology, and in-
vertent weather effects. (These research recommendations were pre-
sented in an earlier chapter in connection with a discussion of weather
modification research needs.) 17 He urged support for a strong research
program, emphasizing the continued need for university research and
for continued support by the National Science Foundation.48
OPPOSITION TO WEATHER MODIFICATION
General discussion
There are individuals and groups who for one reason or another
voice strong opposition to weather modification. Sometimes with
little or no rational basis there are charges heard that various otherwise
unexplained and usually unpleasant weather and weather-related
events are linked to cloud seeding. Such events might include droughts,
floods, severe storms, and extreme temperatures. Often charges are
made, again usually without substantiating data, that the silver iodide
from cloud seeding has caused harm to vegetation or polluted water
supplies.
There are also cases in which some farmers are economically disad-
vantaged through receiving more or less than optimum rainfall for
their crops, when artificial inducement of these conditions may have
indeed been beneficial to those growing different crops whose moisture
requirements are out of phase in time with those of the disadvan-
taged farmer. A frequent complaint of some farmers is that hail sup-
pression to reduce damage to ripening fruit in orchards has attend-
antly reduced the needed rain for growth of field crops.
Sometimes disastrous events have occurred during or soon after
cloud seeding, and, rightly or wrongly, they have been associated with
the seeding. The June 1972 flooding from excessive rainfall in the
Rapid City, S. Dak., area is an example of such a disaster which oc-
curred nearly simultaneously with cloud seeding operations in the
vicinity by the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology. Though
subsequent technical evaluations disclaimed any direct connection be-
tween the flooding and the seeding, opposition in the form of legal
suits and general public reaction persists today.
Opposition to the seeding project above Hungry Horse Dam
Elliott recounts an interesting case where opposition developed to a
seeding project which his company, North American Weather Con-
sultants, had conducted for five winter seasons from 1967-68 through
46 Baum, testimony before the Weather Modification Advisory Board, 1977.
47 See p. 139, ch. 3.
48 Silverman, Bernard A., "Testimony Before the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather
Modification Advisory Board," Champaign, 111., Oct. 14, 1977.
400
1970-71.49 This project, carried out for the Bonneville Power Authority
under contract to the Bureau of Reclamation, required seeding to in-
crease snowpack over the watershed above Hungry Horse Dam in
northwestern Montana. Increased water for hydroelectric power gen-
eration would result in less interruption in industrial power and more
steady employment in adjacent regions of Montana, Idaho, Wash-
ington, and Oregon.50
Local opposition to the program was sharp, however, on the basis of
the possible reduction in the elk population in the nearby Bob Mar-
shall Wilderness Area ; an estimated additional 10 percent in snowpack
was considered capable of destroying the browse needed by the elk in
the winter. The influx of elk hunters each year, spending about $100 per
day each, was an important source of income to the area, and seeding
was regarded as a threat to the hunting industry. Fears were quieted,
however, after a successful program of explaining and teaching about
cloud seeding. Over the 5 years during which seeding occurred, the
elk herds grew larger than they had ever been before.51
Tri- State Natural W eat her Association
Sometimes the groups opposing weather modification are organized
so that they can more effectively solicit and influence public opinion
for general support of their opposition, or so that they can more effec-
tively bring suits or injunctions against weather modifiers. One of
the more persistently vocal groups, active in the Potomac Valley re-
gion of the Mid-Atlantic States, is the Tri-State Natural Weather
Association, discussed in the next section. Activities of an opposition
group in Colorado are considered in a subsequent section.
In the 1960?s, a drought affecting much of the Northeast was blamed
in some counties of West Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania on
cloud seeding. A local group of orchardists, the Blue Ridge Weather
Modification Association, had been contracting with various commer-
cial firms to suppress hail in the region. With the increasing drought,
intense opposition developed against both the seeding company and
the orchardists. Bills outlawing weather modification were introduced
in the legislatures of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, at
the urging of an organized group called the Natural Weather Associ-
ation. A bill passed the Maryland legislature making weather modifi-
cation illegal ; however, this act has since been repealed. Though no
measures were enacted in the other States, ordinances prohibiting cloud
seeding were passed in several south-central Pennsylvania counties,
and a generally negative public reaction to weather modification per-
sists throughout this region. There has been no seeding for some years
in Pennsylvania.52 In 1969 Pennsylvania and West Virginia, both
passed weather modification laws that did not prohibit weather mod-
ification, but they were so restrictive that many operators felt that their
activities were ruled out for all practical purposes.
With the breaking of the drought of the 1960's and several years of
wet weather, some of the controversy subsided. However, the successor
to the Natural Weather Association, the Tri-State Natural Weather
Association, Inc., has continued strong opposition to cloud seeding and
<!> Elliott, "Experience of the Private Sector," 1974, p. 84.
M Ibid.
B1 Ibid.
M Ibid., pp. 82-83.
401
has maintained charges that such seeding activities have been carried
out illegally in the region, both by operators under contract to the Blue
Ridge Weather Modification Association (the group of orchardists
seeking hail suppression) and by the U.S. Air Force, while State
enforcement officials have "looked the other way." Tri-State has
charged that :
Defense Department aircraft work all weather patterns in the mid-Atlantic
States. One section of heavy concentration is the southern tier of Pennsylvania
counties ; according to the Federal Aviation agency, there are as many as 160
flights in a twenty-four hour period. These aircraft disperse ice nuclei at almost
infinity concentrations [sic] and inject it into the atmosphere, starting 24 to 48
hours before weather patterns move into the area. This seeding will dissipate
all summer cumuli storms. In the winter, snows are changed into rain with the
possibility of some increase of precipitation. This additional winter rain helps
make the annual precipitation record look decent. However, rain during the
winter leaches the soil of fertility and severely erodes crop fields. Snow is so
desperately needed for a cover to prevent this damage as well as protection to
prevent heaving of perennials such as alfalfa.53
With regard to enforcement of State laws requiring licensing, and
regulation of weather modification, the following accusation has been
made :
Pennsylvania has earned a reputation of lawlessness relative to cloud seeding.
The past two Secretaries of Agriculture have both stymied all efforts to regulate
weather modification. The Pennsylvania State University has engaged in black-
mail activities against those who want the law enforced, have conducted re-
search in contempt of the law and lied about the outcome of their own results
of cloud seeding. These various agencies have all helped to obstruct law enforce-
ment in the State of Pennsylvania : Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Avia-
tion, Federal Aviation Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Pennsylvania
State University, and all branches of the Federal Government who have or are
doing cloud seeding work. A meteorological Watergate ! 54
Public sentiment in the Potomac Valley, especially among farmers,
has remained strongly opposed to weather modification of all kinds,
and Tri-State Natural Weather Association has continued to lead the
opposition. Once charging only that hail suppression had caused de-
creased rainfall at critical times for farmers, they later also claimed
that cloud seeding materials pollute the atmosphere and induce cancer
and even credited abnormally heavy rainfall to seeding operations.
Paul Hoke, president of Tri-State once stated :
There*s no question that during a dry season, cloud seeding aggravates con-
ditions to produce drought, and during a wet cycle, it triggers even more rain
and probably floods.55
With the return of especially dry conditions in very recent years, a
new wave of opposition was aroused and new charges of illegal cloud
seeding have been forthcoming from the Tri-State Association. Its
vice president, Dr. Edmund R, Hill, professor of earth science at
Gettysburg College and a member of the Pennsylvania Weather Modi-
fication Board, stated that :
According to complaints we get, the pattern is still remaining as it did in the
early 1960's. When a thunderstorm appears to the west or is starting to build
up, a plane will move in mysteriously out of nowhere, and maybe fly once or twice
53 Tri-State Natural Weather Association, "Cloud Seeding ; the Crime of the Century," St.
Thomas. Pa. (no publication date), p. 2.
54 Ibid., p. 1.
55 Elliott, "Experience of the Private Sector," 1974, p. 84.
402
along the leading edge of the thunderstorm, disappear, and the thunderstorm
just practically dissipates.56
In a recent article contributed by the Tri-State Natural Weather
Association to a nationally circulated publication devoted to organic
agriculture, the following evils, supposedly brought on by weather
modification, were cataloged :
1. Cloud seeding has been responsible for the great 5-year drought
in the Northeast United States.
2. Isolated sections in the Northeast have experienced 18 years of
drought due to cloud seeding.
3. Weather disturbances in the South Atlantic [sic] have been
eliminated and has reduced [sic] the east coast's rainfall by 30 per-
cent— rain that is needed if agriculture is to be successful.
4. The average dairy farmer on the east coast, living in an area of
cloud seeding, has averaged a net financial loss because of cloud seed-
ing.
5. Crop production losses in Franklin County, Pa., alone have
amounted to $50 million.
6. When effects of seeding wear off, cloudbursts occur, causing
floods, destroying crops, buildings, and drowning people as well as
livestock.
7. Seeding has been responsible for the serious air pollution prob-
lems.
8. Mental retardation and insanity are traceable to cloud seeding
chemicals.
9. Poisoning of all living matter is directly related to cloud seeding.
10. Emphysema is three times higher in areas of heavy cloud
seeding.
11. Cancer is virulently out of proportion.
12. Financial losses to agriculture and related industries run into
the billions.
13. Forest trees as well as cultivated orchards are dying from chem-
ical reactions taking place in the air due to the addition of cloud seed-
ing agents.
14. The atmosphere has been rendered completely biologically in-
compatible with all living matter, which includes animals, plants, and
humans.57
Tri-State reported that it has requested the President of the United
States to announce a ban on all cloud seeding on or over the Appa-
lachian Mountains and the Atlantic Coastal Plain for 3 years, or until
a Federal regulatory commission is established, in order to "permit the
economy to recover." 58
Citizens for the Preservation of Natural Resources
Commercial cloud seeders were welcomed by many farmers through-
out the High Plains region in the 1950's when that region was hit by a
severe drought; and, even after the drought subsided, interest in
weather modification continued. In the San Luis Valley of southern
Colorado, where precipitation averages 6.5 inches per year and where
M Hill, Edmund R., in testimony, U.S. Congress, House of Representatives. Committee on
Science and Technology, Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere, "Weather
Modification," hearings, 94th Cong., 2d sess., June 15-18. 1976, p. 372.
57 Tri-State Natural Weather Association, "The Rain-Making Myth," Acres, U.S.A. ; a
Voice for Eeo-agriculture, vol. 7, No. 6, June 1977, Kansas City, Mo., pp. 37-38.
68 Ibid., p. 39.
403
crop-damaging hail storms inflict their tolls during summer months,
there has been a continuing interest in the potential for mitigating
these effects through weather modification. In particular, Moravian
barley, an important cash crop used in beer manufacture, is especially
susceptible to damage from hail and dampening from too much rain
during its critical 6- week ripening and harvest period in late summer.
As a possible means of reducing such damages, William K. Coors,
president of the Coors Co., which had contracted to buy most of this
crop from local barley growers, initiated a weather modification pro-
gram for the San Luis Valley which was designed to suppress hail and
divert rainfall during this critical season.59
Barley growers in the five-county San Luis Valley were outnum-
bered by other kinds of farmers and ranchers, however, whose interests
were not benefited from decreased rainfall, though suppression of
hail was of some interest to them. As a result, weather modification be-
came controversial and many farmers were convinced that cloud seed-
ing was responsible for the 1970 drought. That year about 400 ranchers
and farmers banded into a group then called the San Luis Citizens
Concerned About Weather Modification; subsequently, its name was
changed to Citizens for the Preservation of Natural Resources. By
1971, valley people were demanding that weather modification be
stopped, and many charges, some farfetched, were made in opposition
to the seeding project. When citizens of the valley learned that current
State law could not restrain weather modifiers once they had obtained
licenses, there was a campaign, led by State Representative Clarence
Quinlan, himself a rancher in the valley, to enact a new weather modi-
fication statute in Colorado. Since sentiment about weather modifica-
tion throughout the State was mixed, the new law passed by the legis-
lature in 1972 did not ban such activities but does require closer reg-
ulation and public hearings in local areas affected. It is required that
operators clearly show prospects for economic benefit before a permit
is granted.60
In 1972, in spite of much local opposition to the seeding project, and
the recommendation for permit denial by the hearing officer, the
permit was granted with the stipulation that the suppression effort
include hail but not rain. Opposition grew stronger by November,
however, and, at the request of the Citizens for the Preservation
of Natural Resources, county commissioners placed an advisory
referendum on the ballot in the five valley counties. The vote went
heavily against weather modification throughout the valley,
including Rio Grande County where most of the barley
is grown. In a letter to each of the barley growers, Coors
threatened to eliminate its barley purchases from the valley if the
weather modification program were not conducted in 1973 and subse-
quent years. Both sides were represented by legal counsel and technical
witnesses at the controversial spring hearing in 1973 ; however, there,
was no concrete evidence presented by witnesses on either side showing
an increase or decrease in rainfall from past seeding. This second
round of permit hearings resulted again in a recommendation against
f Carter, Luther J., "Weather Modification : Colorado Heeds Voters In Valley Dispute,"
Science, vol. 180. No. 4093, June 29, 1973, p. 1347.
60 Ibid., pp. 1347-1348.
404
the permit from the hearing officer. This time the advisory committee
concurred in the recommendation and the State's natural resource
director denied the permit.61
Coors did carry through with the threatened cutback of barley pur-
chases ; however, the barley growers are now receiving contracts with
another brewery which seems less concerned with the consequences of
weather modification. It has been reported that Valley Growers, Inc.,
the organization of barley farmers in the San Luis Valley, are pro-
ducing more barley than ever.62
No further summertime hail modification has been conducted in the
San Luis Valley, though Valley Growers, Inc., still interested in bene-
fits from weather modification, decided in 1975 to sponsor an opera-
tional snowpack enhancement project in the mountains west of the
valley to increase the water supply from runoff. Though former oppo-
nents opposed this new project, they agreed to discuss the situation and
aired their concerns before the project's sponsors and operator. The
meeting resulted in an agreement between project supporters and op-
ponents that became the condition under which the project was to be
conducted. The condition called for (1) a citizen committee to monitor
operations, and (2) veto authority by a majority of the committee to
suspend operations at any time during the winter season. Both propo-
nents and opponents from different geographical regions affected by
the operations were represented on the committee, and a committee
member was contacted for clearance prior to each planned seeding op-
eration. This is the only known instance of an organized opposition
group agreeing to permit a weather modification project after success-
fully stopping earlier operations. It is possible, however, that there
was less public opposition and skepticism in the case of the newer proj-
ect, owing to the different goals and effects of snowpack enhancement
compared with hail suppression and possible attendant rainfall de-
crease.63
81 Ibid., pp. 1349-1350.
e2Tri-State Natural Weather Association, Inc., "The Rain-Making Myth," 1977, p. 15.
83 Changnon, Stanley A.. Jr., Ray Jay Davis, Barbara C. Farhar, J. Eugene Haas. J. Lore-
ena Ivens. Martin V. Jones, Donald A. Klein, Dean Mann, Griffith M. Morgan, Jr., Steven T.
Sonka, Earl R. Swanson, C. Robert Taylor, and Jon van Blokland, "Hail Suppression : Im-
pacts and Issues," final report. Technology Assessment of the Suppression of Hail, ERP75-
09980, National Science Foundation. Illinois State Water Survey, Urbana, 111., April 1977.
pp. 48-50.
CHAPTER 9
FOREIGN ACTIVITIES IN WEATHER MODIFICATION
(By Robert E. Morrison, Specialist in Earth Sciences, Science Policy Research
Division, Congressional Research Service)
Introduction
The United States has been the world leader in weather modification
research and operations, particularly since World War II, following
the historic discoveries of Schaefer and others. Nevertheless, other
countries have also been active in the field, notable among which is
the Soviet Union. Activities in that country as well as those of some
other nations with larger programs will be discussed in a later section
of this chapter.
Information on foreign weather modification activities is not uni-
formly documented and is not always available. Some information has
been provided through papers which appear in professional journals
or are delivered at professional meetings in this country or abroad.1
There is also information exchange through contacts with U.S. meteor-
ologists who have visited, or have been visited by, their foreign coun-
terparts. However, expenditures for weather modification activities
in a given country are seldom identified, and the size and significance
of the program in a country may be judged disproportionately by
the abundance or dearth of published or other information received
through various channels.
Changnon has collected data from a wide variety of sources which
show that, since the opening of the modern era of weather modification
following World War II, planned weather modification projects have
existed at various times in at least 62 nations through the year 1973. 2
His tabulations take into account only those projects directed toward
precipitation enhancement and/or hail suppression; 57 of the coun-
tries identified had projects aimed at increasing precipitation, while
in 14 countries projects were designed to decrease hail. In 9 coun-
tries there were projects with both goals. These 62 nations, shown on
the map in figure 1, are distributed over all the world's continents
except Antarctica.
Although the locations of the performance of the rain and hail
modification projects are shown in figure 1, the country of origin of
support of weather modification operations is not always evident.
Thus, while projects in the countries of Europe, much of North Amer-
ica, and a few other developed countries like Israel, Japan, and the
USSR have involved their own scientists and resources ; most of the
xCharak, Mason T., "Weather Modification Activity Reports; Calendar Year 1975," Na-
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Environmental Monitoring and
Prediction. Rockville. Md., June 1966, p. 48.
2 Changnon, Stanley A., Jr., "Present and Future of Weather Modification; Regional
Issues," The Journal of Weather Modification, vol. 7, No. 1, April 1975, p. 167.
(405)
406
projects in South America, Africa, and Southeast Asia were under-
taken by American companies or with American financial and tech-
nological support.3
In an attempt to assemble uniform information on the weather mod-
ification activities of member nations, the World Meteorological
Organization (WMO) in 1975 instigated a system of reporting of,
and maintaining a register on, such activities. This WMO mechanism
for collection and dissemination of weather modification project data
is discussed in the next section.
3 Ibid., p. 170.
407
Figure 1. — Nations in which weather modification (rain enhancement or hail
suppression) has been employed during all or portions of the 1946-73 period.
(From Changnou, Present and Future of Weather Modification, 1975.)
408
World Meteorological Organization Register of Weathr Modifi-
cation Projects
At the Seventh World Meteorological Congress in Geneva in 1975,
the WMO approved a Weather Modification Programme, one part of
which is a requirement that the Secretary -General maintain a register
of experiments and operations in weather modification carried out
within member countries. Two reports on these reported projects have
been published by the WMO, covering activities for calendar years
1975 and 1976, respectively.4- 5 Submission of data for the WMO
register is voluntary for member countries; however, most countries
with projects do provide the requested information. Twenty-five na-
tions reported weather modification projects which occurred during
1976, while 16 had provided similar information for 1975. In addition,
member countries with no such activities are also asked to so indicate ;
58 countries reported that there were no weather modification field
activities, either experimental or operational, conducted within their
boundaries in 1976.6 Although the list was not identical, the same
number of countries reported no projects the previous year. Some
countries, including Rhodesia and the Republic of South Africa, with
past and current weather modification projects, are not members of
the WMO ; consequently, their projects are not reported through the
WMO register.
Table 1, adapted from the WMO report of 1976 weather modifica-
tion activities,7 shows the WMO member countries, other than the
United States, within which reported weather modification activities
were conducted during 1976, along with, characteristics of the one or
more projects within each country. Projects reported to the WMO
by the United States, which account for nearly one-half of those in-
cluded in the register, have been removed from table 1, since they are
tabulated elsewhere in this report.8
* World Meteorological Organization, "Register of National Weather Modification Proj-
ects ; 1975," Geneva. 1976, 39 pp.
5 World Meteorological Organization. "Register of National Weather Modification Proj-
ects ; 1976," Geneva, 1977. 24 pp. (An addendum to the report on 1976 projects included
information on activities in the U.S.S.R.)
6 Ibid., app. A.
7 Ibid., pp. 6-12 and addendum.
8 See app. G.
409
- modlflcat
5
8
%
e
I
Is
,»
S
5
|
i
5
*i
s
|
1
11
I'm
2 8
I*
£
|
1 Of 01
■ ring J
i S
i-i
as
1
|
|l
II
i
i
s ■
1 1
IS
JJ: — .
1
2
3
U
5
6
n
8
9
10
iP.G
5HTIHA
B
a) 5,000
b) 1.000
National Anti-Hail Programme
34°S
68°¥
1970
r«
agr
(C)
Rocket pyro Pbl2 400gm
per km rocket trajectory.
-rand*-108Ce"othermsren
reflectivity.
Oct-Mar
Nil
to dat<
ILL
U
PE
b) 60C
HCDAPT (feasibility atudy of
precipitation enhancement
ME Brazil)
40.58V
1971
Yet
Res
(C)
Air dispersal NaCl, HB.HO
ano urea at 7.5 1/min it '
cloud base (appro* 1500m*)
Dec
5
CI
.) 1.6,10«
b) 0.9*10°
MOCLIMA (feasibility of climate
modification through carbon
dust dispersal to absorb solar
energy)
1-18°S
35-47B¥
1975
Yes
Hes
(C)
G/B and Air dispersal of
carbon dust particles
(~0.1«) by incomplete
combustion of hydro-
-
None
BULGARIA
CiSA
M
a) 11,000
Anti-hail cloud seeding
25.5°B
196?
Yes
Agr
(G)
Rocket Pbl2 at 113 tg/h
Hay-Sept
24
PE
a) 200,000
b) 20C.000
Forest Fire Rainfall Enhancement
Project, Yellowknife, nVT, 1976
(N.W.T. 76-01)
62.5°|
114.5 ¥
1975
In
(o)
Air flares Agl at
5O-700g/h or 50-700g/20
aec. Seeding level -10 C
isotherm or 300m below
cloud top, whichever lower
J on- Jul
8
a) 35.000
b) 27,000
Alberta Ball Project
(Alta 76-01)
52.2°I
U5-9TI
1970
Yes
Agr
10]
Air flares Agl at 3000g/h
(wing), 7200g/h (drop-
pable). Cloud top seeding
at temperatures 0 to -8 C
(4500-5500m) and seeding
at base
Jun-Sept
era
PS
a)>5000
19b8
Yes
Hyd
(0)
Air dispersal C0£ and RaCl
Apr-Sept
HOSI/0
PI 1
•) 1J0
b) 90
Hall and precipitation
modification
S.¥.
Slovakia
Tee
Agr
Hyd
(0)
Rockets
KPDBUC OT C
■BUB
H
•) 1440
b) 1200
Bail •uppr«»ion proj*ot
Bo#«nh»t»
47. 8>
12.0°I
1975
let
Agr
For
(0)
Air dispersal Agl
May-Oct
45
ei
m.
a) 5500
b) 1200
Bail Buppr«Mion Kxp«ria«nt of
th« Hungarian P*opl*'a H* pub lie
45.e°t
ie.5°i
1976
Tes
Agr
Ins
Co.
( = )
Rocket pyro Pbl , seeding
in Cb "accumulation tone"
Jul-Oet
12
Table 1. — Weather modification projects reported, by country, through the
World Meteorological Organization Register, with U. S. projects deleted. (See
key at end of table for explanation of columns.) (Adapted from WMO Register
of National Weather Modification Projects, 1976, and addendum.)
410
v
al Rainfall SEnanceaent
ect - EXP III
Alto-Tegliaaento Projeot
Sarca-Chieee Project
tax Project
Central 4
Southern
I.ra.l
*6\
10.7 I
flood control by cloud feting
Sonore Projeot
Artificial rainfall
PHILIPPHBB
■ulatioo operation
Project Ola p- Clan
6-}0,o
102.5 S
116. 5°W
State
apgro.
it
i) G/B gen (42) Agl
ii) Air gen (5)
Agl at 600 g/h
C/B gen (6) agl at 150g/h
(1) C/B gen(40)
Agl at 50 g/h
(ii) C/B gen aobile (5)
Agl at 150 g/h
(lii) Air diepersal at
cloud base (1000-
2000a)
(i) C/B gen (J2)
Agl at 50 g/h
(ii) C/B gen mobile (2)
Agl at 150 g/h
(iii) Air diapereal at
cloud base (1000-2000.)
Air dispersal CaCl
solution at 450a'/ain ■
oloud tops or in cloud
at 5000 ■.
C/B gen W4I/AgI
C/B butane-fired (5) and
electric arc (5) gen eacl
gen Agl 5-7 g/h
0/B butane-fired gen (9)
Agl at 6 g/h, Jh each of
50 seeding days ,
Air spraying at baae
cu/ac (ieO0-2BOOa)
Agl and Pbl solution
20-40 1/h
Air flares in eu cong.
(5000 ->800ai)
Air flares Agl
Air gen Agl 0.16-0.2?
l/.in
Air dispersal Agl in
clouds at leap. -7 to
-12°C (5500-bOOO»)
Air diepersal CO
Air dispersal Agl 5.5g/«
in cold clouds (about
-4°C or 5OOO-55O0.)
Air dispersal laCl in
nan clouds at about
2750 ■
Through-
Apr-Oct
50 g/b;
37(.P-
raj)
47(fle
".)
411
SPAI1
B
w
il experiment: Valle El
Levant e
SHFP (randomized anti-
CTPOH Of SOTIgT SOCIALIST BXFTJBLICS
»)
3500
B
• )
4500
2750
7300
e
a )
8900
I
a )
5«70
H
4580
E
6250
H
3000
FE
•)
10000
R
.)
10000
- ditto -
Soodlag: Co for
additional pptn
Wlntar cloud ■••disc
for additional pp-tn
42-J3 °»J
Georgian BSB
Tadihlakay* SSB
Irlao* (Ukraine)
Koldarian SSI
Armenian SSB
Azerbaijan SSB
EratDOdarek region
I. Catoani
Uabeklotan SSB
Irkutsk
teirutek SSB
EhabaroTak
Chit*
Buryat AS8B
45-46. 5°I (
15.5-190! J
(0)
C/B lessens gen Agl
G/B dlaperaal (rockets) Agl
Artill.rj injection Agl
Socket and artillery Injection
Hooket injection AffI
Artillery injection A*!
Socket and artillery lnjeotion
Air (en Ac I seeded at olsod
baaa
Air dl ape reel Solid CO,
Prro Agl and R> If
Agl 150g cartridges at -10°C
(COOCn)
I eertridgae. llg/lm
Dree cartridges }00g
0°-10°C (4000-WJOOm)
aClOj particles
Powdered clay particles ^0*
412
EXPLANATION OF COLUMNS IN TABLE 1
Col. 1— Type of weather modification (indicated by letters) as follows :
Cl = Climate modification. PE = Precipitation enhancement.
Cy = Tropical cyclone moderation. S = Snow enhancement.
F = Fog dispersal. R = Research experiment.
FC = Cold fog dispersal. X = Flood control.
FW = Warm fog dispersal. Z = Inhibition of convective cloud develop-
H = Hail suppression. ment.
L = Lightning suppression.
Col. 2 — Approximate size of project area : Area given in square kilometers ; (a) indicates
overall area, (b) target area.
Col. 4 — Location of project area : In some cases where coordinates of several points de-
lineating the area were given, these have been replaced by a single point at approximately
the center of the area. Towns and islands may be denoted by name ; A/P = airport.
Col. 7 — Nature of national organization sponsoring project (indicated by abbreviations)
as follows :
Agr = Agricultural. Met = Meteorological.
Erg = Energy. < P) — Private.
For = Forestry. Res = Research.
(G) = Governmental. Ski = Winter sports.
Hyd = Hydrological. Tpn = Transportation.
Ind = Industrial.
Col. S — Apparatus, agents, dispersal rates, etc. : Chemical and SI symbols are used. Ab-
breviations are as follows :
Air = Airborne/ Aircraft. Pyro = Pyrotechnic.
G/B = Ground-based. R/C = Remote-controlled,
gen = Generator.
A copy of the questionnaire and reporting instructions circulated to
WMO member nations for reporting weather modification activities is
included in appendix P of this report. Also included in appendix P is a
list of the names and addresses of the reporting agencies of the member
countries which have weather modification activities.
Description of Weather Modification Activities in Some Foreign-
Nations
THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS
0 vervieio of projects in the U.S.S.R.
The largest weather modification effort outside the United States is in
the Soviet Union, where there are both a continuing research program
and an expanding operational program. The latter is primarily concen-
trated in a program designed to reduce crop damage from hail. In 1976,
about 5 million hectares 9 of Soviet farmland were included under this
operational hail suppression program, whose costs are met by the
Ministry of Agriculture. Both administrators and scientists in the
U.S.S.K. have maintained that these hail-seeding operations — under-
way since the mid-1960's — are successful, and they are to be expanded in
future years. The hail suppression techniques developed in the Soviet
Union are being used in many parts of the country, including the Xorth
and South Caucasus, Moldavia, and Middle Asia, as well as in the
neighboring countries of Bulgaria and Hungary.10
Bat tan estimated that the overall Soviet operational hail suppression
program could employ as many as 5.000 people.11 The Soviet hail abate-
ment program is obviously an important national effort and is clearly
the largest such program in the world. Other interests and activities
in weather modification in the U.S.S.R. include precipitation augmen-
tation and fog dispersal.
9 Approximately 15 million acres.
10 Rattan. Louis J., "Weather Modification in the Soviet Union; 1070." Bulletin of the
American Meteorological Society, vol. 58, No. 1, January 1977, p. 4.
11 Ibid., p. 13.
413
A review of Soviet weather modification activities was written in
1973 by Ye. K. Federov, Director of the U.S.S.R. Hydrometeorological
Service.12 He traces the history of activities in the U.S.S.R. from early
prescientific use of hail cannons, through the scentific investigations by
the Institute of Experimental Meteorology in the 1930's, to the recent
activities in cloud physics research and weather modification, particu-
larly in precipitation augmentation and hail control.13 Federov con-
cludes that cloud-seeding experiments carried out in a number of places
in the U.S.S.R. indicate an approximate 10 to 15 percent increase in
precipitation is possible.14 Because of the great space-time variability
in areas of hail damage, estimates of hail suppression effectiveness are
difficult ; however, a method of evaluation has been developed, based on
changes in the area damaged by hail.15 Table 2 shows areas of coverage
and reported decreases in hail damage reported for the years 1966
through 1970, in the Northern Caucausus and in Georgia, using hail
suppression techniques developed at three Soviet institutions (identi-
fied by the abbreviations VGI, IGAN, and ZakNIGMI).16 Based on
these results, it has been concluded that the average decrease of the area
in which crops were damaged by hail was about 80 percent.17
TABLE 2.— MEAN DECREASE OF HAIL DAMAGE AREAS IN HAIL SUPPRESSION REGIONS OF THE NORTHERN
CAUCASUS (VGI) AND GEORGIA (ZakNIGMI, IGAN) FOR THE YEARS 1966-70
[From Sulakvelidze, et. al., 1974]
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
Total area of protected territory (hectares times 1.000):
VGI
615
890
785
890
960
IGAN
220
320
460
460
460
.ZakNIGMI
50
80
110
150
200
Average decrease in hail damage area (percent):
VGI
90
50
87
99
62
IGAN
76
82
67
69
88
ZakNIGMI
96
91
94
87
Summary of weather modification and related atmospheric research in
the U.S.S.R.
Federov's summary of Soviet activities is concluded with an exten-
sive and valuable listing of 179 references in the Russian literature
on weather modification, cloud physics, and related research, dating
from 1961 through 1972. The citations are listed under the following
topics and subtopics, which give some idea of the scope and direction
of the Soviet research through the early 1970?s : 18
Micro- and macro-structure of clouds :
Studies of the micro- and macro-structure, water content, and
phase state of clouds ; and
Experiments on convection.
Radar studies:
The use of polarization methods of radar study of clouds and
the results of their modification ;
12 Federov, Ye. K., "Modification of Meteorological Processes," in Wilmot N. Hess (edi-
tor), "Weather and Climate Modification," New York, Wiley, 1974, pp. 387-409.
13 Ibid., p. 389-397.
14 Ibid., p. 395.
13 Ibid., p. 397.
18 Sulakvelidze. G. K., B. I. Kiziriva, and V. V. Tsykunov, "Progress of Hail Suppression
Work in the U.S.S.R.," in Wilmot N. Hess (ed.), "Weather and Climate Modification," New
York. Wiley, 1974. p. 42S.
17 Ibid.
18 Federov, "Modification of Meteorological Processes," 1974, pp. 402-409.
34-857 O - 79 - 29
414
Radar methods of measuring microstructure of clouds and pre-
cipitation ;
Orderly and turbulent motions in clouds ;
Radar characteristics of shower and cumulonimbus clouds and
cloud systems ; and
Methods of identifying hail zones and determining the degree
of risk.
Creation and breaking up of convective clouds :
Results of experiments on breaking up cumulus clouds with
loose powders ; and
Stimulating updrafts by means of artificially created jets which
trigger cloud development.
Elementary physical and chemical processes in clouds :
Experiments with the use of a device for modeling cloud proc-
esses;
Studies of elementary processes in clouds, physics of condensa-
tion, coalescence, freezing, and electrification of cloud elements;
Laboratory investigations of action of crystallized reagents,
properties of crystalline and drop fogs, norm of flow rate of
reagents ;
Mechanism of formation of crystals on crystallization nuclei;
Regularities in growth of individual crystals and droplets;
Stochastic theory of condensation ; and
Quantitative theory of processes of formation of crystallization
nuclei, formation of crystallization on zone and its rate of spread,
technique for introducing reagent, characteristics of open zone.
Dissipation of supercooled clouds and f o^s :
Study of conditions permitting fog dissipation, and experiments
on clearing large areas (on the order of 10,000 square kilometers)
of overcast due to a change in the radiation balance.
Modification of hail processes :
Results of studies of processes of formation of hail cloud,
growth of hail and its transformation; development of tech-
niques for modifying hail processes and results of experimental
work.
Augmentation of precipitation from clouds and cloud systems:
Results of modifying frontal cloud systems and air-mass clouds
by means of dry ice ; and increasing precipitation from cumulus
and powerful-cumulus clouds over a Ukranian test area.
Extinguishing forest fires by cloud modification :
Results of first experiments showing practicability of work on
extinguishing forest fires by stimulating artificial precipitation
over fire regions.
Water reserves of clouds suitable for modification :
Studios of water reserves of seedable clouds over various regions
oftheU.S.S.R.
Estimating the effectiveness of cloud modification :
Estimating effectiveness of cloud modification experiments and
monitoring of results of modification.
That such a diversity of research is possible is not too surprising
when one considers the manpower available. Hess notes that Academi-
cian Federov, Chief of the Hydrometeorological Service, has about
415
75,000 people who work for him on all problems of weather and ocean-
ography. By contrast, a somewhat similar agency in mission in the
United States, the National Weather Service, has about 6,000 em-
ployees.19 *
On his 1976 trip to the U.S.S.R., Battan visited a number of re-
search institutions throughout the country at which weather modifi-
cation research is conducted. He estimated that about 600 people are
engaged in various aspects of research in weather modification and
cloud physics, and noted that a younger group of scientists seems to
be replacing the previous researchers in the past few years. The So-
viets have also invested heavily in experimental facilities.20
While hail suppression is considered to be a demonstrated tech-
nology in the Soviet Union and operations continue to increase,
Battan notes that research in hail modification is currently at a low
level. He also reports that research on rainfall augmentation is mostly
concentrated in the Ukraine as it has been for many years; but, it
appeared to him that, overall, the interest in rainfall augmentation
research is relatively low in view of the importance of rainfall to
agriculture. Current rainfall stimulation operations are designed for
extinguishing forest fires rather than increasing water for agricul-
ture. Battan concludes that the Soviet scientists seem to be no closer
to a proven technology for precipitation augmentation than is the
United States and that there still remain unresolved questions on the
efficacy of the Soviet hail suppression techniques.21
ISRAEL
Cloud seeding activities began in Israel in 1948, and research on
precipitation augmentation was conducted in parallel with that in
other countries throughout the 1950,s. Beginning in 1961, a series of
carefully conducted major experiments were initiated which have
produced convincing evidence on the possibility of increasing pre-
cipitation through aircraft seeding of the convective clouds which
move eastward over Israel from the Mediterranean Sea. The first of
these major experiments was conducted from 1961 through 1967, and
the second 61/2_year experiment was begun in 1969 and recently com-
pleted. Though early research had been conducted by the Israeli De-
fense Ministry, present research and operations are supported by the
Ministry of Agriculture.22
Weather modification experimentation in Israel has been accom-
panied by basic cloud physics research, and it is believed that these
intensive physical studies have contributed greatly to understanding
of the precipitation processes, required for development of rain en-
hancement techniques.23
Results of the first Israeli experiment indicated a statistical increase
of 15 to 24 percent in precipitation as a result of seeding, at a high
significance level, while the second experiment showed a 20-percent
19 Hess, Wilmot N., "Progress in Other Countries," in "Weather and Climate Modifica-
tion," New York, Wiley, 1974, p. 385.
20 Battan, "Weather Modification in the Soviet Union ; 1976," 1977, p. 18.
71 Ibid., pp. 18-19.
^Gagin. A., "Testimony Before the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modification
Advisory Board," Reston. Va., Dec. 18, 1977.
23 Gagin, A., and J. Neumann, "Rain Stimulation and Cloud Physics in Israel," in Wil-
mot N. Hess (ed.), "Weather and Climate Modification," New York, Wiley, 1974, p. 462.
416
rainfall increase in the catchment area of the Sea of Galilee. In 1976
an operational cloud seeding program was initiated in the northern
part of Israel, based on these optimistic results, where the target area
is the Sea of Galilee catchment area. Since earlier results for the
southern part of the country are not definitive, however, a third major
experiment has been undertaken for that part of the country.24
Water increases through the Israeli precipitation augmentation
program have been estimated at about 300 million metric tons per
year, at a cost of $400,000. This is equivalent to a rough cost of $1 per
acre-foot. By comparison, the ratio of costs for increasing water
through desalination to those through weather modification is approx-
imately 700 to l.25
AUSTRALIA
Although, in recent years, field experiments have been curtailed,
there has been a major Australian research effort in the past directed
toward precipitation enhancement through weather modification. A
major research program in cloud physics, supportive of weather modi-
fication as well as other aspects of meteorology, is continuing there,
under the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Orga-
nization (CSIRO). Since much of Australia consists of deserts where
rainfall is sparse and unreliable, augmenting rainfall through arti-
ficial means has been appealing there.26
Figure 2. — Location of cloud seeding experiments in southeastern Australia.
(From Smith, Cloud Seeding in Australia, 1974.)
' Gagin, testimony before the Weather Modification Advisory Board, 11)77.
25 Ibid.
20 Smith, E. J., "Cloud Seeding in Australia," in Wilmot N. Hess (ed.), "Weather and
Climate Modification," New York, Wiley, 1974. p. 432.
417
145° 146° 147° 148°
Figure 3. — Experimental areas in Tasmania. (From Smith, Cloud Seeding in
Australia, 1974.)
As elsewhere, early weather modification experiments in Aus-
tralia were conducted between the late 1940,s and the mid-1960's.
During the period 1955 through 1963 four experiments were
carired out at locations shown in figure 2, in order to determine
whether rain over the specific areas could be increased from airborne
silver iodide seeding. These experiments were only partially successful,
owing partly to their design.27 Starting in 1964 and running through
1971, a very successful experiment was conducted in Tasmania, results
of which have indicated a 15- to 18-percent precipitation increase in
winter, though there was no apparent increase during the other sea-
sons.28 (See fig. 3.)
w Ibid., p. 442.
28 Bowen, E. G., private communication, January 1978.
418
In the late 1960's operational weather modification programs for
increasing precipitation were set up and supported by four Australian
States — Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, and South Aus-
tralia— using privately contracted seeding aircraft. The CSIRO oper-
ated courses of instruction in weather modification techniques and
provided information on the state of the art to the States and the
operators. These operational programs have since been discontinued,
however, and there are no such operational programs now in exist-
ence.29
During the period of Australian weather modification experiments,
the funding was partitioned about equally between laboratory research
in cloud physics and the field activities. With the close of the Tas-
manian experiment, nearly all effort is currently performed in the
laboratory or in theoretical studies. The funding level of the program
is about $1 million annually.30
CANADA
The most noteworthy weather modification activities in Canada are
the research and operational hail reduction projects carried out since
1956 in the Province of Alberta. Commercial hail suppression opera-
tions, supported by farmers and conducted from 1956 through 1968,
were summarized recently.31 These nonrandomized operations were
evaluated on the basis of insurance statistics, that is, loss-risk ratios,
and the following conclusions were reached : 32
1. Commercial hail suppression operations (based on the Alberta
project from 1961 through 1968) show a benefit-to-cost ratio of 47 to
1. Added benefits in the study target from rain increase were 30 to 1.
Thus, total benefit -to-cost in the target is about 77 to 1.
2. For the 1961-68 period of operations, the hail damage in the
study target was 71 percent less than during the historical period
1938-60 while at the same time no significant change occurred in the
control area.
3. Fringe benefits from the inevitable rain increase phase over a
total of about 6 million acres (3 times the size of hail suppression
target) yielded a benefit-to-cost of around 90 to 1.
During the same period the Alberta Research Council (ARC) spon-
sored a concentrated study of hail and hailstorms, and seeding was
begun on such storms in 1970. It became apparent in the early 1970's
that there was a disparity between results obtained through this re-
search and the earlier operations.33 As a result, the legislative assembly
appointed a special committee of 10 members to evaluate the situa-
tion and take action which seemed appropriate. A government corpo-
ration was formed for the purpose of running a hail suppression re-
search program, and an interim weather modification board was ap-
pointed by the Minister of Agriculture.34
» Ibid.
3° Ibid.
31 Krick. Irvine: P. and Newton C. Stone. "Hail Suppression in Alberta : 1956-1968," the
Journal of Weather Modification, vol. 7, No. 1. April 1975, pp. 101-115.
32 Ibid., p. 114.
M Simpson. Joanno. "The National Hall Rosoarch Experiment Report on tve Alberta Hall
Project." national hall research experiment technical report NCAR-7100-76/2. National
Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colo., February 1976, p. 3.
3* Ibid., p.
419
The Alberta hail project was initiated in 1973 to accelerate develop-
ment of hail suppression technology and test that technology. Seed-
ing of the 18,000 square mile target area with silver iodide from air-
craft was begun in 1974. While there is randomization by days in the
northern half of the target area, there is full operational seeding in
the southern half.35 Although data from the first 2 years of the experi-
ment were still being analysed when Simpson wrote her evaluation in
1976, she concluded that the following information would likely be
gained from the research under the Alberta hail project : 36
1. Resolving the conditions for multicell versus supercell, leading
to resolution of whether or not different seeding strategies are required.
2. Resolving the merits of on-top versus cloud-base seeding for vari-
ous storm types.
3. Providing "transfer functions'' between crop damage, hailfall
parameters, meteorological conditions, hailpads and hail report cards.
4. Developing and testing, with an adequate data base, numerical
simulations of hailstorms and the conditions conducive to them.
Another Canadian weather modification project of some interest
was initiated in the Northwest Territories in 1975. The purpose of this
Summer Cumulus Rainfall Experiment is to study the possibility of
controlling forest fires through increased precipitation by cloud seed-
ing.37
MEXICO
In a 1976 report on weather modification activities in Mexico,
Kraemer of the Mexican Ministry of Hydraulic Resources summarized
ongoing projects in three principal areas of the country. 37a
Initiated in 1949 with the purpose of augmenting runoff for hydro-
electric power generation, the most sustained operational program
had been sponsored by the Mexican Light & Power Co. in the Necaxa
River watershed. After 1954 ground based silver iodide generators
replaced aircraft seeding, and target and control areas were set up
for evaluation. Since 1956 selection of seeding days was randomized.
Following the 1974 season, seeding operations were suspended, and a
reevaluation of the project was undertaken, preparatory to a redesign
of the seeding operations. A restricted area pilot project was underway
to study techniques of seeding with salt, in view of the warm clouds
passing over the area.38
The Ensenada project on the Baja California Peninsula has been
conducted with the intention of evaluating cloud seeding techniques
for augmenting water resources in this arid region, where both sur-
face and ground water are scarce. Since 1970, experiments have been
carried out by the Secretary of Hydraulic Resources in the northern
part of the peninsula, where seeding is performed during the winter
rainy season, using ground-based generators. Precipitation increments
of 10 to 15 percent were reported over the 9,000-square-kilometer
target area, based on results of a 5-year period of operation of this
35 Ibid., pp. 13-15.
36 Ibid., p. 39.
37 Cbnrak. "Weather Modification Activity Reports : Calendar Year 197o," 1976, p. 51.
37a Kraemer, Dieter (report on recent weather modification activities in Mexico), in "Pro-
ceedings of Conference on Weatber Modification. Today and Tomorrow," 2d annual meeting
of the North American Interstate Weather Modification Council, Kansas City, Mo., Jan. 15-
16. 1976, publication No. 76-1, pp. 85-88.
33 Ibid., p. 85.
420
randomized experiment. In 1976 a decision was made by the Governor
of the state to contract continuation of this project to an American
firm, which would employ aircraft seeding.39
A joint project was established in 1973 by the National Council of
Science and Technology, the Institute of Geophysics at the Univer-
sity of Mexico, and the Federal Ministry of Hydraulic Resources,
with the purpose of carrying out cloud seeding operations in the area
of the Chichinautzin Sierra, near Mexico City, to augment water sup-
plies. Initial seeding operations, begun in 1974, were accomplished
with ground-based generators, with the intention to expand into
aircraft seeding later if advisable. Based on analysis of data from
the first 2 years of these randomized operations, the average precipita-
tion increments over or near the target area were reported to range
from 15 to 75 percent, depending upon the specific location.40
Other pilot or demonstration projects were underway during 1975
and 1976 in southern Baja California and in the Yacamiya River
Basin, and the start of three new programs within a year was being
contemplated.41
In an earlier report Kraemer discussed progress on the projects
discussed above and also included a discussion on the history of
experimental weather modification projects in Mexico. The earliest
experiments there were conducted in the neighborhood of Mexico City
in 1947. Subsequent cloud seeding experiments were sponsored by
various government agencies, some universities, and a few private
companies. Lack of adequate design and control led to suspension of
most of the earlier projects, their subjective, nonstatistically signifi-
cant evaluations providing no valid conclusions.42
people's republic of china
In 1974 a delegation of U.S. meteorologists, representing the Amer-
ican Meteorological Society (AMS), visited a number of meteorolog-
ical institutions in the People's Republic of China, at the invitation
of the Chinese Meteorological Society. As part of their overall orienta-
tion to the activities of their counterparts, they learned about weather
modification research and operational projects in Red China.43 Such
activities are sponsored principally by the Institute for Atmospheric
Physics of the Academia Sinica and by the Central Meteorological
Bureau, both in Peking.
To the visitors there appeared to be an emphasis on application of
weather modification technology over research, and there was an
attempt to incorporate the cooperation and suggested ideas from the
local peasants into the use of such technology. This latter emphasis
has even motivated some experiments which are designed to verify
some of the plausible weather folklore.44
» Ibid., p. 86.
<°Ibid., pp. 86-87.
41 Ibid., p. 88.
42 Kraemer. Dieter, "Cloud Seeding Activities in Mexico," in "Proceedings of Conference
on Weather Modification — A Usable Technology : Its Potential Impact on the World Food
Crisis," North American Interstate Weather Modification Council, Denver, Colo., Jan. 16-17.
1975, pp. 110-120.
« Kellogg. William W., David Atlas. David S. Johnson. Richard J. Reed, and Kenneth C.
Spongier. "Visit to the People's Republic of China : A Report From the A. M.S. Delegation,"
Rulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol. 55, No. 11, November 1974, pp. 1291-
1330.
" Ibid., pp. 1313-1314.
421
Cloud physics and weather modification were listed as major areas
of research at the Institution for Atmospheric Physics. Although there
was a clear historical interest in hail control technology, the actual
hail suppression program had only recently begun and appeared mod-
est to the visitors. The academy's suppression experiments were con-
ducted in Shansi Province and had been underway for 2 years in 1974.
Lacking an organized raingage or hailpad network, evaluation of
seeding operations is through after-the-fact ground surveys and inter-
views to estimate hail size, concentration, and crop damage. Seeding
criteria are based on visual and radar observations.45
A program involving the seeding of warm cumulus clouds in
Hunan Province of southern China is being conducted by the Research
Institute of the Central Meteorological Bureau. Intended to increase
rainfall during arid summers, this project had been in progress for
about 5 years. Seeding was done with pulverized salt, released near
the cloud base from aircraft. Although the project was not random-
ized, there was an attempt to evaluate seeding efforts through visual
observation, by examination of raindrop spectra, and by comparison of
rainfall in adjacent regions. This work was purported to be "promis-
ing.*' 46
There had also been some dry ice seeding experiments during the
spring in the cold clouds in northern and northwestern China. The
sparse raingage network impeded evaluation in the mountainous re-
gions, and the program was discontinued because results were not en-
couraging. Research using ground-based silver iodide burners was
also suspended because of the conviction that the seeding material had
not reached the clouds.47
KENYA
An operational hail suppression program was initiated in 1967 in
Kenya, about 130 miles northwest of Nairobi. The target areas, cov-
ering about 45,000 acres where select tea is grown, are shown in figure
4. The seeding program, supported through 1975 by private tea com-
panies, employed aircraft for dispensing silver iodide at the base of the
clouds. More than 5,700 individual cumulus cloud cells were seeded
during this period, with an average reduction in damage to tea of
about 40 percent, based on comparisons of hail damage from seeded
and nonseeded cloud systems.48
45 Ibid.
46 Ibid., p. 1313.
47 Ibid.
48 Henderson, Thomas J.. "The Kenya Hall Supression Program," the Journal of Weather
Modification, vol. 7, No. 1, April 1975, p. 192.
422
Figure 4. — Location of target areas in the Kenya Hall Suppression Program.
(From Henderson, 1975.)
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
South African crops suffer severely from hail damage. Near Nel-
spruit in the heart of the tobacco area, where citrus and vegetable
crops are also grown, there are typically 50 hail days per year. The
main hail season extends from October to March, coinciding with the
tobacco growth and harvest periods; consequently, damage to this
ultrasensitive crop is often catastrophic.49
The Xelspruit hail suppression seeding project, conducted jointly
by the Lowveld Tobacco Cooperative and the Colorado International
Corp., completed 41/2 years of operation in May 1976, at which time
Simpson had evaluated the first 3% years of the program. Hail in the
7,000 square kilometer target area is produced by warm-based storms,
mostly of the multicell type, and seeding is performed from above,
48 Simpson, Joanne, "Report on the Hall Suppression Program at Nelsprult. Transvaal. Re-
public of South Africa." National Hall Research Experiment technical report NCAR-7100-
76/5. National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colo., June 1976, pp. 3-5.
423
where silver iodide flares are dropped from jet aircraft.50 Analysis of
the results showed decreases of about 40 percent in damage and 20 per-
cent in severity for the seeded cases, based on a comparison with his-
torical control data, though the project is not randomized. Simpson
felt that these results should be regarded with cautious optimism and
found the program to have sufficient merit to warrant its continuation,
but with greater emphasis on evaluation.51
RHODESIA
Experiments were conducted in Rhodesia during 1973-74 to con-
firm the effectiveness of seeding the tops of single cumulus clouds by
aircraft, using pyrotechnic cartridges, to augment rainfall. Random-
ized trials on 20 seeded and 16 nonseeded clouds resulted in average
rainfall about five times heavier for seeded cases than for nonseeded
cases. There was also evidence of less seeding effect under wet con-
ditions.52 The experiments were continued in 1974-75, and it was sub-
sequently learned that seeding by the silver pyrotechnic method is
unsuccessful when cloud tops fail to reach a temperature level of
— 10° C. It has been concluded that economic viability of the cloud
seeding required that clouds reach at least to the —10° C level, the
— 13° C level being even more preferable.53
INDIA
Indian scientists have continued studies of warm cloud seeding. In
one reported study of the dynamic effects of seeding cumulus clouds
with salt in 1973, there was a temperature rise from 1° to 2° C and
an increase in liquid water content before the onset of rain. The
clouds also grew in the vertical by a few thousand feet following the
seeding. These observed features were explained qualitatively by a
kind of chain reaction which involves the process of condensation and
updraft generation.54
Further analysis of data from seeding experiments during the 1974
summer monsoon showed additional positive modification effects. Con-
clusions drawn from radar observations, in-cloud electrical measure-
ments, and microphysical observations following seeding of these
maritime warm clouds with hygroscopic particles are stated below :
1. Out of the four seeded cloud cases, two showed remarkable
increases in areal extent. In the remaining two cases, the areal echo
coverage remained nearly constant in one and decreased in the
other. The echo intensity increased in three cases and decreased in
one case. The height of the echo top increased in all the four cases.
Such features were not noticed in the echoes from the control
clouds.
50 Ibid., p. i.
51 Ibid.
52 McNaughton. D. L., "Seeding Single Clouds Using Pyrotechnic Cartridges, 1973-74,"
the Journal of Weather Modification, vol. 7, No. 1, April 1975. pp. 4. 14-15.
33 McNaujrhton. D. L.. "Cloud Seeding Experimental Program in Rhodesia: 1974-75," the
Journal of Weather Modification, vol. 9. No. 1. April 1977, pp. 89-90.
°* Ramaehandra Murty, A. S., A. M. Selvam. and Bh. v. Ramana Murtv. Dvnamic Effects
of Salt Seeding: in Warm Cumulus Clouds. The Journal of Weather Modification, vol. 7,
No. 1, April 1975, p. 36.
424
2. The in-cloud temperature showed an increase of 0.8° C fol-
lowing seeding.
' 3. The median volume diameter of the cloud droplets and the
cloud liquid water content showed increases in the subsequent
traverses compared to the initial traverses made in the seeded
clouds.
4. The vertical electric field in the cloud, a few hundred meters
above the cloud base, was initially negative and showed sign re-
versal before the onset of precipitation in seeded clouds. The sign
reversal may be attributed to the transport of positive charges
from the higher levels to the lowTer levels inside the cloud by the
precipitation particles which are generally formed at the higher
levels in the strong updraft regions. The electric field also showed
intensification following seeding which could be due to the in-
creased convective activity.55
THE SWISS HAIL EXPERIMENT
In Western Europe hail suppression is conducted by commercial
firms and farmers' cooperatives on a large scale, though scientifically
proven techniques are not currently in use. Hail reduction damage
levels claimed by well-conducted commercial suppression programs
are in the range of 40 to 50 percent ; however, the value of the statis-
tical evaluation is limited due to lack of randomization in the
projects.56
In 1976, the Swiss Federal Division of Agriculture initiated a 5-year
hail-suppression experiment, conducted by the Institute of Atmos-
pheric Physics at Zurich and the Polytechnical Institute. The purpose
of the experiment, called Grossversuch IV, is to test the translatability
of the Soviet hail suppression techniques to a site in central Europe.
Specifically, the experiment has been designed to answer the following
questions :
1. Can the Soviet rocket method be used successfully in Europe,
given the climatic, geographic, and logistic conditions there ?
2. What is the effectiveness of the Soviet method and what is
the relationship between cost and benefits which may accrue to a
given region?
The U.S.S.R. claims that their operations are 70 to 90 percent suc-
cessful in reducing hail damage ; a similar success rate in Switzerland,
taking into account the hail frequency there, should permit completion
of the experiment with statistically significant results during the
projected 5-year period.57
The Swiss Federal Air Office has reserved a space 100,000 hectares
(1,000 km2) by 8 km high in the Napf Highlands, on the northern
slopes of the Swiss Alps, for the experiment. Storms which occur in
this region mostly come from the southwest and travel to the north-
^ Chatterjee, R. N., A. S. Ramachandra Murty, K. Krishna, and Bh. B. Ramana Murty.
Radar Evaluation of the Effect of Salt Seeding on Warm Maritime Cumulus Clouds. The
Journal of Weather Modification, vol. 10. No. 1. April 1978. p. 56.
c« Federer. Bruno, W. Schmld, and A. Waldvoprel. "The Design of Grossversuch IV, a Ran-
domized Hall Suppression Experiment In Switzerland," presented at the First International
Workshop on the Measurement of Hail, Banff, Canada, Oct. 21-26. 1977, Alberta Research
Council. 1977, p. 1.
" Ibid.
425
east, and hail occurs on 16 out of 35 stormy days. Rockets furnished
by the Soviet Union have been employed in the seeding experiment,
following a brief training period by a Soviet expert on use of the
launching ramp. The experiment includes five launching stations and
a command post equipped with three weather radars.58
The experiment has been underway since 1976, following, reasonably
close to the plan of attack as developed then. In addition to the Swiss
investigators, there is cooperative participation from the French and
the Italians, whose contribution is mainly in operating the hailpad
network. Beginning in the 1978 summer seeding season there will also
be U.S. participation from scientists at the National Center for Atmos-
pherical Research (NCAR).59
58 Ibid., pp. 2-3.
58 Squires, Patrick, private communication.
CHAPTER 10
INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF WEATHER
MODIFICATION
(By Lois McHugh, Foreign Affairs Analyst, Foreign Affairs and National
Defense Division Congressional Research Service)
Introduction
Recent years have seen increased international awareness of the
potential benefits and possible risks of weather modification tech-
nology and increased international efforts to control such activities.
The major efforts of the international community in this area are to
encourage and maintain the high level of cooperation which current-
ly exists in weather reporting and research and to insure that man's
new abilities will be used for peaceful purposes rather than as weap-
ons of war. This two sided approach is evident in the activities of the
United States which has strongly encouraged and supported coopera-
tive efforts to gain knowledge of the weather and at the same time has
endeavored to restrict the use of this knowledge to peaceful purposes
through the adoption of international agreements.
Weather research and reporting has long been one of the areas hav-
ing the closest international cooperation. Because of the global nature
of weather systems, making the prediction of weather in one area de-
pendent on reported weather in other parts of the world, cooperation
and exchange of information and techniques of weather research and
reporting are necessities. This cooperation transcends ideological
differences and hostilities.
International cooperation in the exchange of ideas on and methods
of weather modification has also been extensive. Many well attended
international conferences as well as more informal exchanges of scien-
tists and research documents have given nations the opportunity to
expand their own knowledge of weather modification. More recently,
pressures of world population and food shortages, drought, and the
continuing devastation of natural disasters such as earthquakes,
floods, and tropical storms have made the development of weather
modification abilities more critical to nations. The increasing interest
in, and the developing technology relating to man's ability to affect
rainfall, prevent hail, and curb the damage of tropical storms foresees
a, time when it will be essential that the effects of such activities on the
world's weather system be understood and any adverse effects of such
modification be controlled. As with many other scientific areas, the
problems arising out of use and experimentation with weather modi-
fication techniques are not just scientific problems, but political prob-
lems. Although the technology to use weather modification, as well
(427)
428
as the ability to determine how successful such modification technol-
ogy is, are still in the early stages of development, attempts to modify
weather conditions are being made by commercial firms and by gov-
ernments. Thus, with or without a scientific assurance of success,
weather modification has become a source of controversy between
nations.
The increased activity in weather modification world wide has also
resulted in increasing complaints of perceived or potential damage to
the environment both domestically and internationally. For example,
during 1975, at a time when the U.S. Government was supporting re-
search activities to modify the strength of hurricanes, although not
actually seeding any hurricanes, Hurricane Fifi devastated Honduras.
There were several claims at the time, both in domestic and interna-
tional news media that the hurricane was either purposely, or at least
inadvertently, directed at Honduras. More recently, Project Storm-
fury, a U.S. sponsored research program into tropical storm control,
has been forced to limit its areas of experimentation because two of the
countries potentially affected by experimentation in the western Pacific,
the People's Republic of China, and Japan, objected to experimentation
near them, although other nations in the same area welcomed such ac-
tivities. Although the United States is ready to resume experimenta-
tion, recent statements indicate that the Carter administration wants
to look into the liability problem before resuming any actual modifica-
tion activities. The international community has also been troubled by
the issue of liability. In November 1975 the World Meteorological
Organization (WMO) and the United Nations environment program
held a 4-day meeting to discuss, among other issues, the possible lia-
bility of WMO and the other participants in the worldwide precipita-
tion enhancement program which was beginning in response to the
Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment.1
In addition to the problems of damage to countries by commercial or
experimental weather modification activities, another growing area of
concern is that weather modification will be used for hostile pur-
poses * * * that the future will bring weather warfare between na-
tions. The United States has already been involved in one such in-
stance during the Vietnam war when attempts were made to impede
traffic on the Ho Chi Minh Trail by increasing the amount of rainfall
during the monsoon season. After initial public denials of such activi-
ties, former Secretary of Defense Laird, acknowledged that such ac-
tivities had taken place during 1967 and 1968. This information was
contained in a classified letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Com-
mittee in January 1974, and made public later in 1974. Having the
capability to cause natural disasters will further blur the line between
conventional and unconventional warfare and increase the risk to
civilian populations, who would be caught in the same natural disaster
as the enemy army. Additionally, if weather modification techniques
are developed by nations without corresponding understanding or
concern for the world weather system., widespread, and conceivably
irrevocable damage can be done to nations not involved in the
hostilities, as well as to those at war.
1 U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office
of Environmental Monitoring and Prediction, "Weather Modification Activities for Calendar
Your 1075," Rockville, Md., June 1976, p. 47.
429
Even the perception that weather modification techniques are avail-
able and are in use could lead to an increase in international tensions.
Natural drought in a region, or any other unusual natural disaster,
will be suspect or blamed on an enemy. The results of this insecurity
were discussed by Edith Brown Weiss, a scientist and proponent of
passage of a treaty banning the use of weather modification as a
weapon of war, during her testimony before the Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee :
Accepting any environmental modification techniques as legitimate weapons
undermines the already shaky distinction between conventional and unconven-
tional means of warfare. It makes acceptable the idea of using techniques of envi-
ronmental modification as a weapon of war. . . . Even the chance that States will
be able to use some techniques for hostile purposes without violating the Con-
ventions casts suspicion on the development and use of weather modification
technology for peaceful purposes. In the long run, it can endanger the interna-
tional cooperative programs in weather forecasting and atmospheric research,
which help us to understand and use weather to benefit mankind.2
In light of these problems, the international community has made
scattered attempts both to further the study of weather and its modi-
fication and to insure the peaceful use of this new technology. The Con-
vention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of
Environmental Modification Techniques, which was signed in Geneva
for the United States on May 18, 1977 (but which has not yet been sub-
mitted to and approved by the Senate) and the precipitation enhance-
ment program sponsored by the World Meteorological Organization
are the most outstanding examples of these attempts.
In the United States, the Congress has taken the lead in formulating
a foreign policy on weather modification. Passage in 1973 of Senate
Eesolution 71, calling for an international agreement to limit the use
of weather modification in warfare, was the first major step taken in
this area and occurred over the objections of the administration. The
National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976 required the Secre-
tary of Commerce to develop a national policy, or alternative national
policies on weather modification, including international aspects of it.
This chapter will briefly outline the activities of international orga-
nizations in the area of weather modification as well as the activities
of the Congress and the executive branch which deal with international
activites in weather modification. United States military activities and
the activities of other nations will be discussed elsewhere in this report.
Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other
Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques
development of the treaty
On July 3, 1974, the United States and the Soviet Union issued a
joint statement recognizing the potential danger of the use of environ-
mental modification in warfare and agreeing to :
1. Advocate the most effective measures possible to eliminate
the dangers of this type of warfare ; and
2. Meet during 1974 to explore the problem and its solution.
One year prior to this communique, the Senate had adopted by a
2 U.S. Congress, Senate, Subcommittee on Oceans and International Environment, "Pro-
hibiting Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques," hearing, 94th Cong., 2d
sess., Jan. 21, 1976, Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976, p. 29.
34-857—79 30
430
large majority a resolution calling upon the U.S. Government to nego-
tiate a treaty controlling the use of environmental modification as a
weapon of war.
On August 7, 1974, Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko sent a letter
to the Secretary-General of the United Nations asking that a resolu-
tion advocating the conclusion of an international convention prohib-
iting environmental modification for military purposes be added to the
agenda of the 1974 U.N. General Assembly.3 The Soviet Union sub-
mitted, on September 24, 1974 a resolution calling for a convention and
a draft convention entitled "Prohibition of Action to Influence the
Environment and Climate for Military and Other Purposes Incompati-
ble with the Maintenance of International Security, Human Well-
Being and Health." 4
The proposed convention was quite far reaching. For example,
article 1 stated that each party to the convention "undertakes not to
develop meteorological, geophysical or any other scientific technologi-
cal means of influencing the environment, including the weather and
climate, for military and other purposes incompatible with the mainte-
nance of international security, human well-being and health, and,
furthermore, never under any circumstances to resort to such means of
influencing the environment and climate or to carry out preparations
for their use." Article 2 listed 1 2 specific activities which were to be
prohibited. Other articles prohibited parties from assisting other
states in such activities and noted that nothing in the convention was
meant to impede scientific progress or the development of methods to
improve the environment for peaceful purposes. Violations were to be
reported to the Security Council, and parties would adopt national
controls to prevent their citizens from taking actions contrary to the
treaty. After 5 years a conference of the parties would be held to revise
the convention if necessary in light of scientific developments.5
After debate, the General Assembly amended the resolution to elim-
inate some of the ambiguities the members found, adopted it on
December 9, 1974, and requested the Conference of the Committee on
Disarmament (CCD) to proceed "as soon as possible to achieving
agreement on the text of such a convention" as the one proposed by the
Soviet Union and to submit a report on the finding to the next session of
the General Assembly.6 (The United States abstained on this vote
after noting in the debate that the problem had not been defined and
it was premature to conclude that a convention would be feasible or
effective.) 7
3 United Nations mimeographed document Xo. A/9702. 1074.
4 United Nations mimeocrraphed document Xo. A/C1/L675, 1974.
5 United Nations document A/9910, Dec. 6, 1974.
6 A/Res/3264 (XXIX) .
7 Senator Stuart Symington, a member of the U.S. delegation to the 29th session of the
United Xations General Assembly summed up the reasons for the United States stand as
follows :
"The public explanation of our stand was that 'even with the commendable changes ac-
cepted by the Soviet delegation, the resolution as it now stands still appears to prejudge how
the committee would consider the question.'
"The reason for our abstention appeared to be the fear that this general recommendation
might result years hence in a treaty, subject to a two-third vote of approval by the Senate,
tbal in some respect the executive branch might not like. This fear to explore even the pos-
sibility of a legal regime for environmental modification seems to approach excessive
caution."
U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations. "The United Xations. the United
States and Anns Control." report by Senator Stuart Symington, member of the delegation
to the United Xations. May 197.". 94th Cong., 1st sess., committee print, Washington. U.S.
Government Printing Office, 197"5, p. 4.
431
Early in November 1974, the United States and the Soviet Union
>egan meeting to develop a joint approach to a treaty prohibiting the
ise of environmental modification as a weapon of war. These meetings
continued through the summer of 1975. During the summer of 1975,
he CCD was also holding meetings on the draft convention proposed
jy the Soviet Union in September 1974. In August of 1975, the Soviet
Jnion and the United States submitted identical draft conventions to
he CCD. At the time the U.S. delegate noted that the submission of
dentical texts was important, that the major issues had been identified
ind that discussions had shown that a consensus had clearly been
eached on the desirability of achieving such an agreement.8
On July 1, 1976, the CCD established a working group to consider
he modifications of the joint draft convention and in early September
ransmitted a completed draft convention to the United Nations Gen-
•ral Assembly. The General Assembly adopted the resolution, calling
:or acceptance of the draft convention on December 10, 1976, by a re-
:orded vote of 96 to 8 with 30 abstentions.9
The resolution directed the Secretary General to open the conven-
ion for signature and ratifications. The convention was opened for
ignature in Geneva on May 18, 1977, and was signed by the United
States and 33 other nations.
CRITICISM OF THE CONVENTION
Even before the Convention wac opened for signature, there was a
rreat deal of criticism of its contents. Critics claimed that it contained
oopholes that seriously weakened the treaty. One action taken by sev-
ral environmental groups was to file a law suit against the State De-
)artment on the grounds that the Department was required to file an
nvironmental impact statement on the effects of the Convention.
In addition to these environmental groups, several members of the
United Nations, scientists and members of Congress have been critical
>f the Convention. The main criticism is that the treaty only partially
>ans environmental modification techniques in warfare. The question-
ible language is centered in the language of article I, which reads :
Each State Party to this convention undertakes not to engage in military or
ny other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having ivide-
pread, long-lasting, or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or in-
ury to another State Party. [Emphasis added.] 10
The italicized language is the so-called troika language, which was
iot in the original Soviet draft, but was used in the joint Soviet/
Jnited States communique, leading to the conclusion that it was added
.t the insistence of the United States.
In a paper prepared for the General Assembly debate, the Govern-
ment of Mexico called this phrase "in every respect inadequate and
mbiguous.11 And Dr. Edith Brown "Weiss, in testifying on January 21,
976, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee stated :
Article 1 indicates that the convention covers only environmental modification
?chniques "having widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects". Ironically, the
5 United Nations. General Assembly, Conference of the Committee on Disarmament, re-
ort. vol. I. New York, United Nations. 1976, p. 61. (United Nations, document A/31/27
nited Nations. General Assembly, official records. 31st sess. suppl. No. 27.)
9 Text of the resolution published in the Department of State bulletin, Jan. 1, 1977. pp.
6-29.
10 Text of treaty included in app. C.
n See United Nations Document No. A/C.1/31/S Nov. 16, 1976, p. 2.
432
language sounds like it covers only those techniques which are least developed —
such as techniques for climate modification. . . . There are important ambiguities
in this draft about the extent to which weather modification activities are cov-
ered by its prohibitions and about whether the use of environmental modification
techniques incidental to facilitating the effectiveness of other weapons is
covered.12
Secondly, the Convention was criticized for its lack of effective en-
forcement procedures. Complaints of violations of the Convention are
to be referred to the Security Council where both the United States and
the Soviet Union, the countries with the leading capabilities to develop
technology for weather warfare, have a veto. Critics contend that giv-
ing the power to investigate violations and determine whether dam-
ages can be claimed to the veto-prone Security Council makes enforce-
ment of the treaty impossible.
In defending the proposed treaty to Congressman Gilbert Gude. the
Director of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, Fred C.
Ickle, wrote in September 24, 1975 :
The anticipatory nature of the proposed Convention carries with it many of
the basic uncertainties of the future, and I anticipate criticisms of different
aspects of the agreement from several sides. The alternative to action now would
be to attempt restraint at a later time, when the possibilities of hostile use of
environmental modification techniques may be more real. An agreement on pro-
hibitions might then be more difficult to achieve.13
In a f ollowup letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee com-
menting on the comments of Dr. Weiss, Mr. Ickle stated :
Because certain effects are not listed, she questions whether all uses are pro-
hibited. The presence or absence of any technique in the list does not indicate
that it is allowed or prohibited — all hostile uses of all environmental modifica-
tion techniques having widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects would be pro-
hibited by the Convention.14
Finally, concerning the enforcement procedures, this same letter
commented :
It is unlikely, as a practical matter, that a permanent member of the Security
Council would exercise its veto to prevent an investigation of a complaint
brought against it (or an ally), since such an act would probably be taken as
confirmation of a violation by many UN members.15
The Convention, as approved by the General Assembly, calls upon
the parties to look again at the provisions of the Convention in 5 years
time to insure that the Convention is in fact fulfilling its purpose. This
will give critics an opportunity to strengthen the Convention.
ACTIVITIES SINCE THE UNITED NATIONS APPROVAL OF THE CONVENTION
The Convention was opened for signature on May 18, 1977. At that
time Secretary of State Vance made a statement which many regarded
as an indication that the United States was willing to reexamine the
use of the so-called troika language. His comments were :
In the view of the United States, the effect of the convention should be to elimi-
nate the danger of environmental warfare because it prohibits all significant
12 U.S. Congress. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations. Subcommittee on Oceans and
Internationa] Environment. "Prohibiting Hostile Use of Environmental Modifications Tech-
niques.-' hearing, Jan. 21, 1976, 94th Cong., 2d sess., Washington, U.S. Government Print-
ing Offipp. 1976.
» Ibid., p. 6.
M Ibid., p. 18.
" Ibid., p. 17.
433
hostile use of environmental modification techniques. According to the present
terms, the convention limits the prohibition to those uses having "widespread,
long-lasting or severe effects." The United States will be prepared to reexamine
this limitation on the scope of the convention at the review conference or pos-
sibly before.16
In the fall of 1977, the law suit against the Department of State was
dropped when the Department agreed to prepare an environmental
assessment statement (not an environmental impact statement), and
submit it to the Senate with the Convention. According to the Depart-
ment of State, this statement will discuss what the Convention does, in
the Department's understanding, what weather modification tech-
niques are currently available and thus covered by the Convention, and
will state that the only use of weather modification for hostile use ever
engaged in by the United States was in Vietnam (see section on con-
gressional activities).17 The way has now been cleared for transmittal
of the Convention to the Senate, which is expected to take place during
1979.
As of mid 1978, 50 nations had signed the Convention, and 19 had
ratified it.
Activities of the World Meteorological Organization in Weather
Modification
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has been a special-
ized agency of the United Nations since 1951, although its predecessor,
a nongovernmental organization, the International Meteorological Or-
ganization, dates to 1873. WMO's responsibilities include the coordina-
tion, standardization, and improvement of meteorological services
throughout the world and the encouragement of an efficient exchange
of meteorological information between countries.
The WMO is the international organization which historically more
than any other has been involved in various aspects of weather modi-
fication. According to a WMO background paper prepared for the pre-
cipitation enhancement project WMO activities in the area of weather
modification began as early as 1955 with the publication of a technical
note (study) devoted to the scientific aspects of cloud and precipita-
tion control.18 By the early 1970?s the general awareness and interest in
inadvertent as well as planned weather modification had increased to
the point that WMO felt it necessary to issue guidelines to handle in-
quiries from member nations on weather modification. The statement,
entitled "Present State of Knowledge and Possible Practical Bene-
fits in Some Fields of Weather Modification" was first published in
1971, and revised and amplified in 1975.
By 1972 WMO found it necessary to issue "Guidelines for Advice
and Assistance Related to the Planning of Weather Modification Ac-
tivities" in order to answer the more specific questions being asked of
WMO. At the same time, a working commission of WMO was desig-
nated as a panel of experts on weather modification for the WMO,
thus creating a permanent panel to monitor and study weather
modification.
16 "United States Signs Convention Banning Environmental Warfare," statement by Sec-
retary Vance, Department of State bulletin, June 13, 1977, pp. 633^.
17 See p. 441.
18 World Meteorological Organization, "Plan for the Precipitation Enhancement Project
(PEP)," PEP report No. 3, Geneva, November 1976.
434
PRECIPITATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM (PEP)
Following a world wide survey of weather modification activities
and interests in 1972 and 1973, the WMO concluded that it should be-
come more active in weather modification and during 1974 began for-
mulating a program on weather modification and estimating its costs
with the view that these could be studied and implemented during the
1976-79 financial period. The WMO Weather Modification Pro-
gramme was adopted in 1975. At the time, the WMO Congress stated
that:
WMO was the appropriate international body with the necessary scientific and
technical expertise in this field, and agreed that the time had come for the organi-
zation to become more active in order to provide the best possible advice to mem-
bers, the United Nations and other international organizations concerning
weather modification. In view of the urgent need to find ways of increasing world
food production and conserving water supplies, it was agreed that priority in this
field had to be given to increasing precipitation.
Considering that the results of most rainmaking projects up to that time had
been inconclusive because of the lack of sound scientific planning, operation and
evaluation, Congress agreed that scientifically convincing answers concerning the
feasibility of precipitation enhancement could best be advanced through an in-
ternationally planned, executed and evaluated experiment in precipitation stimu-
lation.19 (
Thus the major element of the new Weather Modification Pro-
gramme would be a precipitation enhancement project (PEP). The
aim of PEP is to plan, set up, and carry out an international, scien-
tifically controlled precipitation enhancement experiment in a semiarid
region under conditions where the chances of increasing precipitation
on the ground in amounts big enough to produce economic benefits are
optimal. The objectives listed by WMO are as follows :
(a) To provide members with reliable information about the
probabilities of successful artificial intervention in meteorological
processes with the object of increasing the amount of precipitation,
over an area of the order of 10,000 km2. The size of the area for the
proposed project (that is, the target and nearby control areas)
should be somewhere around 50,000 km2, a scale large enough to
provide adequate evaluation of scientific feasibility and economic
benefit, but small enough to permit the use of adequate methods for
seeding and observations ;
(b) To demonstrate at a satisfactory statistical significance level
over a relatively short experimental period (5 years) that any
increase observed is not a chance event but is associated with the
seeding. The principal evaluation of this experiment will be in
terms of precipitation at the ground;
(e) To obtain sufficient understanding of the meteorology and
cloud physics in the area of the experiment to insure that the sta-
tistical association of seeding and any increase in precipitation
will be generally acceptable as a cause-and-effect relationship;
(V) To make an examination outside the target area in order
to determine whether any benefits of seeding extend over areas
greater than the target area, or whether there 1ms merely been a
romparatively local redistribution of precipitation;
18 Ibid., p. 21.
435
(e) To make systematic measurements varying from mesoscale
to cloud micostructure in order to develop additional covariates to
strengthen the power of the statistical analysis ;
(/) To obtain well documented scientific evidence that may lead
to the optimization of the effects of seeding. For this purpose a
series of systematic cloud physics measurements should be taken
on a routine basis. This would allow the application of statistical
stratification techniques to relevant physical parameters, and
could shed more light on the quantitative aspects of the seeding
technique ;
(g) To be able to make some recommendations about the ap-
plicability of the PEP procedures to other areas of the world;
and
(h) To make an assessment of the environmental impact of
precipitation enhancement activities both within and outside the
experiment target area.20
The plan for PEP is divided into three phases. A preparatory and
site selection phase of at least 2 years will develop criteria for the
selection of regions and sites, develop the plan for the precipitation
enhancement experiment, and select the sites to be used. This phase has
already begun. The second phase will be the actual scientific field
experiment and will last 5 years. The third phase will be an evaluation
of the results. While this will begin during the second phase, it will
extend 1 year beyond the end of the phase two.21
PEP will be funded by members on the basis of their participation
and by the individual efforts of interested members. The WMO budget
will fund only the costs related to international coordination and guid-
ance and not the experiment itself or its evaluation. The main role of
the WMO is to encourage members in the cooperative effort, to safe-
guard the scientific integrity of the program, to insure that it is con-
ducted in the best possible way, and to disseminate the results to inter-
ested members. WMO will support three separate groups responsible
for the international coordination and guidance aspects of the experi-
ment as follows :
(a) The Precipitation Enhancement Project Board should be
an intergovernmental Board consisting of representatives of mem-
bers making the major contributions to the project and to which
observers from interested UN organizations and ICSU should be
invited. The Board will represent the main management body;
proposing plans of action to the Executive Committee within the
limits of available financial resources;
(b) The Executive Committee Panel on Weather Modification
with supplementary expertise as necessary will provide the Execu-
tive Committee and the Secretary-General with advice on details
of the objectives of PEP and how these could be achieved in
principle. It should guide the preparation of the plans to be re-
viewed by the Board ; and
(c) The Scientific Planning Group at WMO headquarters will
work on PEP as a part of the WMO Research and Development
Programs, using the available experience and support of the
20 Ibid., p. 2.
21 Ibid., p. 3.
436
Secretariat. The detailed functions of the Scientific Planning
Group should decide upon the relationships between the Scientific
Planning Group, the PEP Board, and the Executive Committee
Panel on Weather Modification.22
OTHER WMO ACTIVITIES IN "WEATHER MODIFICATION"
Other WMO activities have paralleled U.S. domestic activities in
weather modification. These have included conferences of experts,
registration of weather modification activities of member nations, and
the problems of liability for potential damage caused by weather modi-
fication activities.
Registration and reporting of tveather modification projects
One important effort of the WMO has been in the area of registration
of weather modification projects. Beginning in 1973, the WMO began
sending questionnaires to member nations asking them to report on
their weather modification activities. While compliance with this re-
quest was completely voluntary, well over half of the members did
report on their activities. In 1975, as part of the weather modification
program adopted by the WMO Congress, the WMO Secretary General
was required to maintain a register of experiments and operations in
the weather modification field carried out within member countries.
Out of a total 1975 membership of 138, 74 nations replied and 16
reported weather modification activities. Parts of the most recent re-
port, covering activities for calendar year 1976, are included and
discussed in the chapter on foreign activities. (See chapter 9.)
WMO conferences on weather modification
The WMO has sponsored two conferences on weather modification.
These were preceded by another international conference, which was
sponsored jointly by the Australian Academy of Science and the
American Meteorological Society and was held in Canberra, Australia,
from September 6 through 11, 1971. The first WMO international
conference on weather modification, sponsored jointly with the Inter-
national Association of Meteorology and Atmospheric Phvsics, was
held in Tashkent, U.S.S.R., on October 1 through 7, 1973." The con-
ference included 270 participants from around the world, both from
countries with active weather modification programs and from those
only interested in the subject. The conference covered fog dispersal,
rain and snow enhancement, hail suppression, modification of tropical
storms and thunderstorms, technical and operational aspects of weath-
er modification, physical, statistical and economic evaluations of
weather modification and ice nucleus technology.23 A second conference,
sponsored by WMO with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-
ministration, the International Association of Meteorology and At-
mospheric Physics, the American Meteorological Society and the
22 List. Roland, "Objectives and Status of the WMO Precipitation Enhancement Project
(PEP)." Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, p. 6,
(Unpublished paper provided bv National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.)
m The proceedings of this meeting were published by the WMO in 1974, WMO publication
No. 399, Geneva, Switzerland.
437
Australian Academy of Sciences was held in Boulder, Colo., from
August 2 through 6, 1976.24
Typhoon and serious storm modification
Another area of weather modification activity, typhoon and serious
storm modification, has also been an area of concern to the WMO. Sev-
eral efforts at learning about and controlling typhoons or tropical cy-
clones have been jointly sponsored by the WMO. Together with the
Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East of the United Na-
tions (now the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific), the WMO has established a Typhoon Committee which con-
centrates on improving civil preparedness against typhoon damage.
Because so little is understood about typhoons, most of the activities
undertaken have been research and the collection and analysis of
meteorological information about tropical weather.
A WMO sponsored Technical Conference on Typhoon Modification,
which was held in Manila in October of 1974, endorsed a 24-hour limit
on typhoon modification experiments, which would permit experi-
mental seeding of typhoons if they were not expected to reach land
within 24 hours.23 A 1972 resolution of the UN General Assembly
praised the efforts of the WMO in this area and requested the WMO to
keep the UN informed of progress in its tropical cyclone project.26
Global Atmospheric Research Programme
, An important project sponsored jointly by WMO and the Interna-
tional Council of Scientific Unions is known by the acronym GARP
for Global Atmospheric Research Programme. This is an information
gathering and research project, rather than a weather modification
project per se. The data from GARP is expected to contribute to the
development of long-range weather prediction and the development
of large scale weather modification theories. Hopefully, successful new
methods of weather forecasting will emerge from this program and
the new information can be used to carry out computer simulations of
weather modification activities on a global scale. GARP is expected to
complement the worldwide measurement of atmospheric particulates
and gases to be undertaken as part of the Earthwatch Program of the
U.X. Environment Program established by the Stockholm conference.
Legal aspects of weather modification
The WMO and the United Nations Environment Program jointly
sponsored an informal meeting on the legal aspects of weather modifi-
cation in Geneva, Switzerland during November 17 to 21, 1975. This
meeting had a double purpose. First, the group was asked to consider
the formulation of legal principles for weather modification, bearing
in mind the principles adopted at Stockholm in 1972. (See the fol-
lowing section on United Nations Conference on the Human Environ-
ment.) Second, the group was asked to give particular consideration to
legal liability of the WMO regarding the precipitation enhancement
program, then in the early planning stages. The principles considered
but not adopted are contained in the mimeographed report of the
meeting, pages 5 through 8, which is reproduced as appendix Q.
24 The WMO publication on this conference was entitled. "Papers Presented at the Second
WMO Scientific Conference on Weather Modification," WMO-No. 443, Geneva, Switzerland,
1976.
23 WMO Technical Conference on Typhoon Modification. Manila, Oct. 15-18, 1974, state-
ment on typhoon moderation, mimeographed WMO document.
26 United Nations document No. A/Res/2914 (XXVIII) Nov. 13, 1972.
438
United Nations Conference on the Human Environment
The' United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, held in
Stockholm, Sweden, from June 5 through 16, 1972, has been the pivotal
point in much recent international environmental activity, and it has
also been an important catalyst in international activities relating to
weather modification. Conferences held in preparation for the Stock-
holm Conference and programs initiated by it are the major coopera-
tive weather modification activities of the 19T07s, and it is the interna-
tionally agreed upon principles adopted at Stockholm which are being
considered in the development of international legal principles apply-
ing to cooperative weather modification activities. Many of these activi-
ties are discussed in other sections. The Conference adopted an "Action
Plan for the Human Environment" based on a "Declaration" agreed to
by the participants.
DECLARATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON THE HUMAN
ENVIRONMENT
The declaration consists of a preamble and 26 principles of conduct
intended to serve as guides for states in dealing with environmental
problems of international significance. Principles 21 and 22 particu-
larly ali'ect weather modification activities. Principle 21 deals with
state responsibility for damage to the environment of other nations,
and principle 22 calls on states to cooperate in developing international
law regarding liability and compensation for such damage. The two
principles are :
"Principle 21
"States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations
and the principle of international law, the sovereign right to exploit
their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies, and
the responsibility to insure that activities within their jurisdiction
or control do not cause damage to the environment of other states or
of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.
"Principle 22
"States shall cooperate to develop further the international law re-
garding liability and compensation for the victims of pollution and
other environmental damage caused by activities within the jurisdic-
tion or control of such states to areas beyond their jurisdiction." -T
ACTION PLAN FOR THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
The action plan consists of some 200 recommendations for national
and international action — a framework for future environmental
agreements. Although much of the action plan relates to weather more
generally and pollution of the air and water, one recommendation in
27 U.S. Congress, Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations. "United Nations Conference on
the Human Environment," report to the Senate by Senators Claiborne Pell and Clifford
Case, members of the delegation to the United Nations Conference on the Human Environ-
ment. October 1972. 92d Cong., 2d sess., committee print, Washington, U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1972, p. 18.
439
particular applies to climate modification. Recommendation 70 reads
as follows :
It is recommended that Governments be especially mindful of activities in
which there is an appreciable risk of effect on climate ; and
(a) Carefully evaluate the likelihood and magnitude of climatic effects and,
to the maximum extent feasible, disseminate their findings before embarking
on such activities ;
(b) Consult fully other interested states when activities carrying a risk of
such effects are being contemplated or implemented.28
In discussing this provision, Senators Claiborne Pell and Clifford
Case, members of the U.S. delegation to the Conference, criticized
what they saw as an amendment which "considerably weakened'' the
provision. This amendment, introduced by the United States and
adopted by the Conference, added the phrase "to the maximum extent
feasible" to section (a) as printed above. Concerning this amendment,
the Senators' report states :
The U.S. amendment appears to provide a loophole whereby any country could
conduct covert military weather modification operations without any form of
international control or responsibility. This, we feel, is contrary to a resolution
which we and 14 other Senators have introduced in the Senate which expresses
the sense of the Senate that the U.S. should seek the agreement of other govern-
ments to a proposed treaty prohibiting the use of any environmental modification
activity as a weapon of war. We adamantly oppose the use of environmental tech-
niques as weapons of war and strongly urge the Administration to actively pro-
mote the negotiation and ratification of such a treaty.29
The resolution referred to in the above quotation, and the discussion
surrounding its passage, are discussed in the section on congressional
activities.
EARTH WATCH PROGRAM
The major project developing from the Stockholm Conference in
the area of atmospheric changes is the Earthwatch program. While the
program as a whole is designed to assess global environmental condi-
tions in all areas from water pollution to food contamination, one of its
first projects will be to measure pollution levels around the world and
study their effects on climate * * * the inadvertent modification of
weather. The Earthwatch program which will be set up under the
auspices of the World Meteorological Organization, will consist of the
following major elements :
Ten baseline stations to measure the long term global trends which
may ultimately cause climate changes. These stations would be estab-
lished in remote areas far from any sources of pollution.
One hundred additional stations to monitor the air quality on a
regional basis. This monitoring will be coordinated by the WMO.
Establishment of water borne stations to measure containments in
major rivers, lakes, and seas.
Establishment of research centers and biological centers to analyze
changes in soil conditions and plant and animal life.
STUDY OF MAX'S IMPACT OX CLIMATE
Of the many conferences and preparatory meetings held prior to the
Stockholm Conference, one in particular is noteworthy. In 1970, sup-
28 Ibid., p. 36.
» Ibid., p. 5.
440
ported by the U.N. Secretariat and the World Meteorological Organi-
zation,'30 scientists from 14 countries participated in the Study of
Man's Impact on Climate (SMIC), sponsored by the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and hosted in Sweden by the Eoyal Swedish
Academy of Sciences and the Eoyal Swedish Academy of Engineering
Sciences.30 The purpose of the study was to provide an authoritative
assessment of the state of scientific understanding of the possible im-
pacts of man's activities on the regional and global climate. Based on
this assessment, specific recommendations were developed for programs
that would provide the knowledge necessary for more definitive an-
swers in these complex areas. Many of these recommendations were
incorporated into the Action Plan for the Human Environment. One
in particular bears mentioning separately. This suggested "that an
international agreement be sought to prevent large-scale (directly
affecting over 1 million square kilometers) experiments in persistent or
long term climate modification until the scientific community reaches
a consensus on the consequences of the modification.31
Other International. Activities
united states/canadian agreement
The Agreement between the United States of America and Canada
Relating to the Exchange of Information on Weather Modification
Activities was signed and entered into force on March 26, 1975.32 The
agreement provides that the United States and Canada will exchange
information on weather modification activities occurring within 200
miles of their common border or wherever else they may occur if it is ex-
pected that the activities will affect the "composition, behavior, or
dynamics of the atmosphere over the territory of the other Party."
When possible, this information will be transmitted to the other party
prior to the beginning of the activities.
NORTH AMERICAN INTERSTATE WEATHER MODIFICATION COUNCIL 33
The North American Interstate Weather Modification Council
(XAIWMC) was organized on January 17, 1975, by representatives
of the governments of several U.S. States and Canadian provinces and
the Mexican Government. Its purpose is to coordinate and serve as a
focal point for intrastate, interstate, and international weather modi-
fication activities. This would include research into weather modifica-
tion, legislation and treaties governing weather modification activities,
and public information activities as well as its coordination functions.
Membership is open to any state or province of the United States,
Canada, and Mexico.
Affiliate membership is available to national agencies, political sub-
groups within the States, professional organizations and scientific
w "Study of Man's Impact on Climate," Stockholm, 1970, inadvertent climate modifica-
tion ; report, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Tress, 1971.
a1 Ibid., p. 19.
32 20 UST 54 ; TIAS 8056, reproduced in app. F.
33 Tills information is taken from a document entitled : "Weather Modification. North
American Interstate Weather Modification Council. 'Its purpose and activities'." Office of
the NAIWMC, Executive Secretary, Box 3CE, NMSU, Las Cruces, N. Mex., 88003 Septem-
ber 1970, publication No. 76-2.
441
societies. Current membership of NAIWMC consists of 15 members
and affiliates in all three countries. In its brief history, NAIWMC
has taken an active role in legislation (including testifying) proposed
at both the State and Federal level concerning weather modification.
Additionally, NAIWMC has supported directly or indirectly five in-
terstate conferences on weather modification and made the proceedings
of the conferences available to the public.34
Congressional Activities
Although congressional interest in domestic weather modification
activities has grown steadily for many years, interest in the interna-
tional aspects is more recent. With the exception of one resolution dis-
cussed in the following section, all such activities in the Congress have
taken place since 1970.
WEATHER MODIFICATION AS A WEAPON OF WAR
Senate Resolution 71, prohibiting environmental modification as a
weapon of war
In December 1971, Senator Claiborne Pell inserted a statement in
the Congressional Record indicating his concern over the possible use
by the United States of precipitation enhancement (rainmaking) in
Southeast Asia and the future use of these and other weather modifi-
cation techniques in warfare. He expressed concern that such activities
carried on by any countries for other than peaceful purposes might
endanger international cooperation in peaceful weather collection
and modification activities. The Senator urged that the United States,
through the President, renounce the use of geophysical and environ-
mental research for other than peaceful purposes and take the initia-
tive in framing and introducing a treaty imposing a prohibition on
all forms of geophysical and environmental warfare. Senator Pell
said he would introduce a resolution setting forth a draft treaty on
weather modification in order to generate discussion and action in
this area.
At the time of Senator Pell's statement, the Department of Defense
had completed several precipitation enhancement projects for Govern-
ment agencies both in the United States and abroad.
Several news columnists had claimed that precipitation enhance-
ment had been used in Vietnam in articles appearing early in 1971,
and these operations were later mentioned in the Pentagon papers,
which were released in June 1971. On January 26, 1972, Senator Pell
inserted in the Congressional Record his correspondence with the De-
partment of Defense in attempting to confirm or deny the newsmen's
allegations.35 After several months of correspondence, the Defense
Department declined to answer the questions publicly on the basis
that such a reply would threaten the national security. Senator Alan
Cranston and Congressman Gilbert Gude received the same response
to their inquiries. During an April 1972 appearance before the Senate
34 See ch. 7, p. 333, for references to the five meetings and other activities of the North
American Interstate Weather Modification Council.
35 Congressional Record (daily edition) Jan. 20, 1972 : S 507-508.
442
Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary of Defense Laird was ques-
tioned by both Senator Pell and Senator Fulbright about rainmaking
in Vietnam. The Secretary said : "We have never engaged in that type
of activity over Xorth Vietnam." 36
On March 17, 1972, Senator Pell and 15 cosponsors introduced S.
Res. 281, stating the sense of the Senate that the U.S. Government
should seek agreement with other governments to a treaty calling for
the complete cessation of any research, experimentation, and use of
environmental or geophysical modification activity as a weapon of
war. Hearings were held on S. Res. 281 on July 26 and 27, 1972.37 At
the time the Department of State indicated that they were not in
favor of passage of the resolution and proposed treaty. The State
Department spokesman stated :
* * * we believe that there is at present too much uncertainty about essential
facts and that the factual basis itself is insufficient to make possible any funda-
mental decisions on whether a treaty dealing with military aspects is feasible
and desirable.
It is therefore our conclusion that actions such as those recommended in S. Res.
281 are premature. Accordingly, the Department of State recommends that this
resolution not be adopted.38
Several other witnesses made comments on the proposed treaty, as
well as commenting on the need for a treaty. Several resolutions on the
subject of a treaty were offered in the House of Representatives during
1972. but no final action was taken in either the House or Senate during
the 92d Congress. S. Res. 281 was endorsed unanimously by the NATO
North Atlantic Assembly on November 21, 1972, indicating a broad
international interest in the subject of an international weather modifi-
cation treaty.39
On February 22, 1973, Senator Pell introduced S. Res. 71 for himself
and 18 cosponsors. This resolution was identical to S. Res. 281, and after
consideration by the Foreign Relations Committee, was recommended
favorably to the Senate on June 27, 1973 with three amendments. The
amendments indicated that the committee felt the United States should
seek a multilateral treaty, including all the permanent members of the
United Nations Security Council, that the treaty contained in the reso-
lution was only a model, and that the resolution in no way intended to
impede or restrict research or experimentation on use of environmental
modification techniques for peaceful purposes. S. Res. 71 was approved
by the Senate by a vote of 82 to 10 on July 11, 1973.40
Conoressional activities related to hostile use of weather modification,
1974-76
Tn January and March 1974, Senator Pell's Subcommittee on Oceans
and International Environment of the Senate Foreign Relations Com-
mittee held more hearings "concerning the need for an international
3« Shapley, Deborah, "Rainmaking : Rumored Use Over Laos Alarms Arms Experts. Scien-
tists." Science. .Tune 16. 1972, as reproduced in Congressional Record (daily edition)
Juno IF,. 1972 : S 9555-9556.
T'.S. Congress. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations. Subcommittee on Oceans
and International Environment, "Prohibiting Militarv Weather Modification." hearings on
S. Ros. 281. 92d Cong., 2d sess., July 26 and 27, 1972, Washington. U.S. Government Print-
ing Office. 1972, 162 pp.
38 Ibid., p. 20.
"M S Congress, Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations, "Eighteenth meeting of the
Atlnntic Assembly," report of the U.S. delegation, committee print, 93d Cong., 1st sess.,
May 11. 1973.
4" s. Res. 71 reproduced in app. R.
443
agreement prohibiting the use of environmental modification and geo-
physical modification as weapons of war." 41 At the time Senator Pell
noted that since the administration had made no move in 6 months,
the hearing was being held to shed light on the reasons for the delay.
Dining the hearing the State Department spokesman stated :
* * * the Secretary (of State) expressed regret that it was not yet possible to
provide a coordinated executive branch response on S. Res. 71. He assured you
that the matter would be looked into closely to determine how the executive branch
misht be responsive to the resolution's recommendations.
In this regard the President has directed that a study of the military aspects
of weather and other environmental modification techniques be undertaken. Fur-
ther *teps will be determined subsequent to the findings of this study and the re-
view of those findings.42
At the classified March briefing (later declassified and printed with
the above hearing) the Department of Defense outlined the precipita-
tion enhancement project which took place over Laos, North Vietnam,
and South Vietnam between 1967 and 1972. According to both the De-
partment of Defense spokesman and the Senators present at the hear-
ing, the program was very modest, its success was questionable, and
because of this questionable success, the environmental impact was
most likely negligible.
During 1974 and 1975, the House International Relations Committee
considered several resolutions calling for an international agreement
prohibiting the use of weather modification as a weapon of war. None
of the resolutions passed, but hearings were held during both 1974
and 1975.43
. On January 21, 1976, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sub-
committee on Oceans and International Environment, held a hearing
which concentrated on executive branch comments on the Draft Con-
vention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of
Environmental Modification Techniques which was then being con-
sided by the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament.44
OTHER CONGRESSIONAL ACTIONS RELATING TO WEATHER MODIFICATION
Senate Concurrent Resolution 67 — U.S. Participation in the World
Weather Program
Senate Concurrent Resolution 67, which passed the Senate, as amend-
ed by the House, on May 29, 1968, made it the sense of the Congress that
the United States should participate in, and give full support to, the
world weather program then being developed under the auspices of the
United Nations. This weather program included the World Weather
Watch, an international system for the observation of the global atmos-
'■ 41 U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations. Subcommittee on Oceans and
International Environment. "Weather Modification" hearings : 93d Cong.. 2d sess., Jan. 25
and Mar. 20. 1974. (Top secret hearing held on Mar. 20. 1974; made public on May 19,
1974) Washington, U.S. Government Printing Ofiice, 1974 ; 123 pp.
< 42 Ibid., p. 9.
, 43 U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Foreign Affairs. Subcommittee on International
Organizations and Movements. "Weather Modification as a Weapon of War." hearing, 93d
'Cong.. 2d sess.. Sept. 24. 1974. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1974; 39
pp. Committee on International Relations. "Prohibition of Weather Modification as a
Weapon of War." hearing. 94th Cong., 1st sess., Julv 29, 1975. Washington, U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office. 1975. 51 pp.
1 44 U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations, Subcommittee on Oceans and
■ International Environment. "Prohibiting Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Tech-
niques." hearing. 94th Cong., 2d sess., Jan. 21, 1976, Washington, U.S. Government Print-
ing Office, 1976, 46 pp.
444
phere and more rapid and accurate processing of weather data. A
second part of the world weather program was to be the conduct of a
comprehensive program of research for the development of a capability
in long-range weather prediction, and for the "theoretical study and
evaluation of inadvertent climate modification and the feasibility of
international climate modification." 45
National Weather Modification Act of 1976 46
The National Weather Modification Policy Act of 1976 (Public Law
94-490, Oct. 13, 1976) stated as its purpose to "develop a comprehen-
sive and coordinated national weather modification policy and a na-
tional program of weather modification research and development."
This would include the development of "both national and interna-
tional mechanisms designed to minimize conflicts which may rise with
respect to the peaceful uses of weather modification." The law called
for a study which shall include "a review of the international impor-
tance and implications of weather modification activities by the United
States," a review and analysis of the necessity and feasibility of nego-
tiating an international agreement concerning the peaceful uses of
weather modification, and "formation of one or more options for a
model international agreement concerning the peaceful uses of weather
modification and the regulation of national weather modification."
Finally, the law required that the Secretary of Commerce report to
the Congress within 1 year on, among other things, the international
agreement specified above.
In response to this directive from the Congress, the Secretary of
Commerce established the Weather Modification Advisory Board
which has recently begun holding meetings to develop this national
policy and provide the Secretary with information necessary to make
the report to Congress.47
Senate Resolution J$
Another piece of legislation, Senate Kesolution 49, was introduced
by Senator Pell on January 24, 1977. This resolution, which was also
introduced during 1976, calls upon the President to initiate negotia-
tion of a treaty requiring the preparation of an environmental impact
statement for any activity which may reasonably be expected to have
a significant effect on the environment of other nations or a global
common area. Senator Pell held that a treaty of this sort would insure
that environmental modification activities could not be carried out
without considering the consequences of such activity beyond a na-
tion's own territory. A hearing was held on this resolution by the Sen-
ate Foreign Relations Committee on March 31, 1977, and again on
May 18, 1978.
U.S. Foreign Policy
Congress has shown a growing interest in the development of a
U.S. policy toward international weather modification activities.
However, the executive branch has seemed reluctant to develop such
48 Congressional Record (bound ed.) vol. 114, part 7, Apr. 1, 1968, p. 8419.
46 Text included in app. I.
47 See ch. 5 for discussion of the activities of the Weather Modification Advisory Board.
445
a policy, preferring to await further developments in weather modifi-
cation technology. The National Weather Modification Policy Act of
1976 (discussed in a previous section) requires that the Secretary of
Commerce suggest a national policy including both domestic and in-
ternational aspects of weather modification. In pursuance of this leg-
islation, the Secretary of Commerce established the Weather Modi-
fication Advisory Board under the chairmanship of Harlan Cleveland
to assist her in developing such a policy. The report of this Board
is expected to be submitted to the Secretary for her approval and sub-
sequent transmittal to the President and the Congress during 1973. 4S
VARIOUS EXECUTIVE BRANCH PROPOSALS
Despite executive branch reluctance to develop a comprehensive
policy in dealing with weather modification, including its interna-
tional aspects, many statements have been made by various executive
branch spokesmen on the subject and many studies encouraging the
United States to develop such a policy have been made. As early as
1961, President John F. Kennedy proposed before the United Nations
further cooperative efforts between all nations in weather prediction
and control, and U.S. financial support for international weather ac-
tivities has been substantial. In the intervening years, additional
statements have been made. These have generally been of a cautious
nature, expressing hope that the technology can be used to help man-
kind, but fearful of its consequences if used foolishly or with mali-
cious intent. On January 26, 1971, Secretary of State William P.
Eogers stated the common theme :
We are anxious to apply weather modification technology, as it becomes op-
erational, to the problems of developing countries. We are also alert to the need
to consider international arrangements to deal with the implications of this new
phenomenon.*9
During the same year, the National Academy of Sciences, an orga-
nization of distinguished scientists and engineers which has a long and
close relationship with the U.S. Government, prepared a study of the
future of the atmospheric sciences which made the following recom-
mendations to the United States :
The U.S. Government is urged to present for adoption by the United Nations
General Assembly a resolution dedicating all weather modification efforts to
peaceful purposes and establishing, preferably within the framework of inter-
national nongovernmental scientific organizations, an advisory mechanism for
consideration of weather modification problems of potential international con-
cern before they reach critical levels.50
Again in 1972, in a program proposed by its review panel on weather
and climate modification, the National Academy of Sciences recom-
mended efforts to develop a weather modification program devoted to
peaceful and safe international uses with the proposal of a three-goal
program for U.S. activities. The goals outlined by the panel were:
Completion by 1980 of research to put precipitation control on a
sound basis ;
48 See discussion of activities of the Weather Modification Advisory Board in ch. 5, p. — .
49 Department of State Bulletin, vol. LXIV, No. 1651. Feb. 15. 1971, p. 198.
60 U.S. National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Atmospheric Sciences, "The Atmos-
pheric Sciences and Man's Needs," report, 1971, p. 56.
34-857—79 31
446
Development, in the next decade, of the necessary technology to
move toward mitigation of severe storms ; and
Determination by 1980 of the extent of inadvertent modification
both of local weather and of global climate.51
As early as 1965, the Special Commission on Weather Modification
of the National Science Foundation (a Federal agency) issued a report
on weather and climate modification which included the following
suggestions for the national policy on the international uses of weather
modification :
"The Commission believes that :
"1. It would be highly desirable for the Government of the United
States, in connection with the expansion of its program of weather and
climate modification, to issue a basic statement of its views on the rela-
tionship of this national effort to the interests, hopes, and possible
apprehensions of the rest of the world. Early enunciation of national
policy embodying two main points are recommended :
"(a) That it is the purpose of the United States * * * to pur-
sue its efforts in weather and climate modification for peaceful
ends and for the constructive improvement of conditions of human
life throughout the world ; and
"(b) That the United States, recognizing the interests and con-
cerns of other countries, welcomes and solicits their cooperation,
directly and through international arrangements, for the mutual
achievement of human well-being.
"This cooperation should cover both research and ultimately, opera-
tional programs of interest to other countries. It should be concerned
not only with deliberate, but also inadvertent human interventions in
the atmosphere that affect weather and climate. Such a policy declara-
tion could be issued by the President or appropriately incorporated in
any basic legislation on the subject of weather modification which the
Congress may enact.
"2. Steps should be taken by the United States, in concert with other
nations, to explore the international institutional mechanisms that
may be appropriate to foster international cooperation and cope with
the problems which may be anticipated in the field of weather and
climate modification.
"3. Attention should be given to the question of how greater empha-
sis can be given to atmospheric sciences in existing bilateral and
multilateral programs of education and technical cooperation; and to
what additional measures may be needed to fill this deficiency.
"4. Encouragement should be given to research on the impact of
weather modification measures in foreign countries. The need has been
previously discussed for greater attention to the biological, economic
and social aspects of weather modification in the United States. A
different set of problems may well be encountered in many of the
developing countries where the natural environment and patterns of
oronomic and social life present contrasts to those prevailing in this
country. A greater understanding of the significance of these differ-
ences must precede any attempt to evaluate the suitability of various
"J Sullivan, Walter, "Goals for U.S. Urp;ed on Weather Control," New York Times, Dec. 29,
1972; p. 50.
447
weather and climate modification practices for specific foreign areas
and to design appropriate programs of cooperation." 52
NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE OX TIIE OCEANS AND ATMOSPHERE
Public Law 92-125, adopted in 1971, established the National Advi-
sory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA). One purpose
of NACOA is to "undertake a continuing review of the progress of the
marine atmospheric science and service programs of the United
States," 53 and the committee was required to submit an annual report
to the President and the Congress. Among the recommendations for
action in its first annual report (1972) were the following which con-
cerned international aspects of weather modification :
International : International agreement should be arrived at and the necessary
institutional arrangements developed to eschew the hostile uses of weather mod-
ification and to investigate changes in the global climate * * *.
NACOA wishes to associate itself with the position taken by the Nation Acad-
emy of Sciences that, in order to safeguard the life-sustaining properties of the
atmosphere for the common benefit of mankind, the U.S. Government is urged Lo
present for adoption by the United Nations General Assembly a resolution dedi-
cating all weather modification efforts to peaceful purposes and establishing,
preferably within the framework of international nongovernmental scientific
organization, an advisory mechanism for consideration of weather-modification
problems of potential international concern before they reach critical levels.54
After mentioning the subject in intervening reports, the Fifth
NACOA Annual Report of June 19T6 discussed U.S. weather modifica-
tion activities in detail. A 1975 report of a subcommittee of the Domes-
tic Council was cited as an excellent basis for U.S. policy regarding
weather modification activities.55 Among its recommendations for do-
mestic policy changes, the subcommittee also discussed the importance
of assessing the potential international implications of weather modifi-
cation activities. The Federal weather modification program was criti-
cized for, among other things, its fragmented approach to the prob-
lems and technological developments involved. In discussing the
United States effort in weather modification, NACOA supported this
criticism and added the following paragraph dealing with the interna-
tional weather modification situation :
An important element in the weather modification picture is its international
aspect. The World Meteorological Organization is proceeding with its own plans
for an international weather modification research program, and it is important
that the United States be prepared to participate. There are also international as-
pects to the pursuit of our own program goals. NOAA's Stormfury project, which
studies the effects of intervening in the dynamics of tropical convective storms
and offers hope of a future ability to modify hurricanes, was to be moved from
the Atlantic to the western Pacific for scienific reasons. Objections on the part of
some western Pacific nations prevented this move and it will instead be conducted
in the eastern Pacific and western Atlantic. It is important to the ultimate success
of this effort that we recognize that other nations which might be affected, or
52 "Weather and Climate Modification." report of the Special Commission on Weather
Modification. National Science Foundation. 1965, pp. 27-29.
53 National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere. "A Report to the President
and the Congress, " first annual report, June 30, 1972, Washington, U.S. Government Print-
in? Office, 1972, p. 43.
M Ibid., p. 21.
55 "The Federal Role in Weather Modification." a report of the Subcommittee on Climate
Change of the Environmental Resources Committee, Domestic Council, December 1975.
448
\Thich believe they might be, have a legitimate interest in understanding its ex-
pected benefits, the risks involved, and the safeguards proposed.56
ACTIVITIES IN 197 7
The Weather Modification Advisory Board, established under the
chairmanship of Harlan Cleveland to assist the Secretary of Com-
merce develop a national policy on weather modification, has held sev-
eral meetings during 1977. Its final report to the Secretary of Com-
merce is expected during 1978.
In a reorganization prompted by the new administration, coordina-
tion of international weather modification activities has been placed
under the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Sci-
entific Affairs in the Department of State. The Interagency Study
Group, which is responsible to the Bureau of Oceans and International
Environmental and Scientific Affairs, has as its function dealing with
the problems of international relations in weather modification ex-
perimentation by the United States. Thus far it has dealt solely with
the problems involved in the continuation of Project Stormfury, a
project concerned with tropical storm modification, at the request of
NOAA. In addition to negotiating with other countries, primarily
Mexico, concerning experimentation, the study group is examining the
potential problems of liability of the United States for damage done
by official U.S. weather modification activities.
56 National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere. "A Report to the President
and the Congress," fifth annual report, June 30, 1976. Washington. U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1976. pp. 53-o4.
CHAPTER 11
LEGAL ASPECTS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION
(By Nancy Lee Jones, Legislative Attorney, and Daniel Hill Zafren, Assistant
Chief, American Law Division, Congressional Research Service)
Domestic*
The legal issues presented by weather modification are complex and
unsettled. These issues can be divided generally into four broad cate-
gories : Private rights in the clouds, liability for weather modification,
defenses which may be raised against such liability, and methods of
controlling weather modification. Before a discussion of these issues
is begun, it should be noted that the body of law concerning weather
modification is slight and existing case law offers few guidelines for
the determination of these issues. For this reason it is often necessary
to attempt to analogize the issues which arise concerning weather mod-
ification to other, more settled, areas of law such as the general law
of water distribution.
PRIVATE RIGHTS IN THE CLOUDS
Several different issues have been raised concerning private rights
in the clouds : First, are there any private rights in clouds or in the wa-
ter which may flow from them ; second, does a landowner have any par-
ticular rights in atmospheric water ; and third, does a Aveather modifier
have rights in atmospheric water. It has been argued that there are
no private rights in the clouds or their water since they are common
property which belongs to everyone who would benefit from them.
Analogies have been drawn to animals ferae naturae. As one commen-
tator has stated :
Clouds, and therefore the ability to modify weather, differ from most types of
property, either real or personal, in that there is no way in which they may be
captured or possessed. Man cannot force a cloud to stay over his property or keep
it from passing over his property. In this respect clouds have often been com-
pared to animals ferae naturae. Animals ferae naturae cannot be owned because
they cannot be possessed. Therefore since this common law element of ownership
cannot be met, they are the common property of all, not the individual property
of any one person. (Citations omitted.) 1
This theory of common ownership of the clouds and any water they
might contain has also found support in one of the few cases discussing
weather modification. In Pennsylvania Natural Weather Association v.
Blue Ridge Weather Modification Association, 44 Pa. D. & C. 2d 749
(1968) , the court stated :
We are of the opinion that clouds and the moisture in the clouds, like air
and sunshine, are part of space and are common property belonging to everyone
* Nancy Lee Jones, legislative attorney, American Law Division, Congressional Research
Service.
1 "Legal Aspects of Weather Modification in Texas," 25 Baylor L. Rev. 501, 502 (1973).
(449)
450
who will benefit from what occurs naturally in those clouds. There could be
just as. much injury or harm from weather modification activities as there could
be from air and water pollution activities. We hold specifically that every
landowner has a property right in the clouds and the water in them. No indi-
vidual has the right to determine for himself what his needs are and produce
these needs by artificial means to the prejudice and detriment of his neighbors.2
Before the issues of the rights of the landowner and the weather
modifier in atmospheric water are discussed, it should be noted that
some State statutes specifically reserve the ownership or right to use
atmospheric wTater to the State.3
There have been a few cases which have discussed the rights of a
landowner in atmospheric water. As quoted above the Pennsylvania
court in Pennsylvania Natural Weather Association v. Blue Ridge
"Weather Modification Association did state that "* * * every land-
owner has a property right in the clouds and the water in them." Sim-
ilarly, in Southwest Weather Research., Inc. v. Duncan, 319 S.W. 2d.
910 ( 1958 ) , aff'd. sub. nom. Southwest Weailier Research, Inc. v. Jones,
327 S.W. 2d 417 (1959) , the Texas court stated :
We believe that the landowner is entitled, therefore and thereby, to such rain-
fall as may come from clouds over his own property that Nature, in her caprice,
may provide.
This theory enunciated in Southwest Weather Research, Inc. v.
Duncan is similar to the common law doctrine of natural rights which
is basically a protection of the landowner's right to use his land in
its natural condition. One commentator has stated that "All forms of
natural precipitation should be elements of the natural condition of
the land. Precipitation, like air, oxygen, sunlight, and the soil itself,
is an essential to many reasonable uses of the land * * *."4
However, in Slutsky v. New York, 97 N.Y.S. 2d 238 (1950), a New
York court held that resort owners who were attempting to enjoin
weather modification experiments "* * * clearly (had) no vested
property rights in the clouds or the moisture therein." The weather
modification experiments in this case were undertaken in an attempt
to supply the city of New York with an adequate supply of water in
the face of a drought and the court also stated that it must balance
the competing interests involved.
All three of these cases have limited value in resolving the issue of
a landowner's rights in atmospheric water since they involved only
the narrow issue of the right of a landowner to have a temporary in-
junction against cloud seeding. Also both the Pennsylvania and New
York decisions rested on the issue of causation; they both determined
that the landowner was not entitled to relief since he had not proved
that weather modification would interfere with the weather.
In the absence of a statutory determination of the ownership of
atmospheric water and in the lack of a well developed body of case
law, analogies may be drawn to some general common law doctrines.
The doctrine of "natural rights" has already been noted above; in
addition to this doctrine, the "ad coelum" doctrine may also be in-
structive. This concept has been attributed to Accursius of Bologna
2 Pennsylvania Natural Weather Association v. Blue Ridge Weather Modification 4.«so-
Ciation, 44 D. Jfc C. 2d 749. 7f>9 TOO (1968).
"Colo. Rev. Stat. s<>c. 30-20-10.°,: La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 37 sec. 2201; Neb. Rev Stat. sec.
2-2401 : N. Meat. Stat. Ann. sec. 75-37-3 ; N. Dak. Cent. Code sec. 2-07-01 ; and Wyo. Stat.
sec. 9-207.
* "Who Owns the Clouds?" 1 Stan. L Rev. 43 (1948).
451
who stated "Cujus est solum ejus debet esse usque ad coelum." This
maxim has been translated as whoever has the land ought to be pos-
sessed of all the space upward to an indefinite extent.5 Blackstone ac-
cepted tliis doctrine and stated :
Land hath also, in its legal signification, an indefinite extent, upwards as
well as downwards. Cujus est solum, ejus est usque ad coelum (whoever has
the land possesses all the space upwards to an indefinite extent), is the maxim
of the law; upwards, therefore, no man may erect any building, or the like to
overhang another's land : ... So that the word "land" includes not only the face
of the earth, but every thing under it, or over it.®
The coming of the airplane required some modification of this doc-
trine, since if a landowner owned the space above his land to an
infinite extent, airplanes would have been unable to fly over land with-
out committing a trespass. In United States v. Oausby, 328 U.S. 256
(1945), the Supreme Court rejected the "ad coelum" doctrine and
stated that "The air is a public highway ..." 7 The Supreme Court also
stated how much of the space above his property the landowner owns :
The landowner owns at least as much of the space above the ground as he
can occupy or use in connection with the land . . . The fact that he does not oc-
cupy it in a physical sense — by the erection of buildings and the like — is not
material.8
It could be argued from this language that since a landowner can
use the space above the ground for weather modification he also owns
it.
Other analogies may be drawn to the doctrines of riparian rights
and appropriation. Riparian rights have been defined as ". . . those
appurtenant to land abutting a watercourse, granting the landowner
the right to reasonable use of the water, subject to similar correlative
rights held by owners of other lands abutting the watercourse," 9 This
analog}' is also not a close one since atmosphere does not flow in water-
courses. It has been stated that . . the analogy is farfetched, if not
false. . . ." 10 An analogy with the doctrine of appropriation ma}' be
considered more appropriate since it gives a priority of right based
upon actual use; however, like riparian rights, appropriation rights in
water are limited to water naturally flowing in the watercourses.
This doctrine of appropriation would probably be of greater help
in arguing that the weather modifier has certain rights in atmospheric
water.11 The appropriation doctrine recognizes legal interests based
on development and use of water, not on land ownership. It has been
stated that :
The appropriation of water consists in the taking or diversion of it from some
natural stream or other source of water supply, in accordance with law, with the
5 R. Wright. "The Law of Airspace" 13-14 (Indianapolis 1968). It has heen stated that
Aceursius had in mind the rights of the owners of burial plots to have such land free from
overhanging buildings. D. Halacy. Jr. "The Weather Changers*' 205 (New York. 1968).
6 2 Blackstone, "Commentaries on the Laws of England" ch. 2. at 19 (p. 445 in Cooley
ed. 1899) cited in R. Wright, "The Law of Airspace" 12-13 (Indianapolis, 1969).
7 United States v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256, 260 (1945).
* 8 Id. 264. For a detailed discussion of this case and aviation and airspace ownership
generally see R. Wright, "The Law of Airspace" 101-209 (Indianapolis, 1968).
8 4 "Waters and Water Rights" 471 (R. Clark, ed. 1970).
10 The Weather Modification Law Project Staff, University of Arizona, School of Law.
"The Legal Implications of Atmospheric Water Resources Development and Management"
17( 1968).
11 It should be noted that the doctrine of appropriation is based on State statutory or
constitutional provisions. These provisions must be examined carefully in determining
rights in a specific State.
452
intent to apply it to some beneficial use or purpose, and consummated, within a
reasonable time, by the actual application of all of the water to the use desig-
nated.^
It has been argued that the extension of the appropriation doctrine
to weather modification would offer several advantages : This doctrine
is being adopted by increasing numbers of States and is supported by
a large body of statutory and case law ; the administrative procedures
of these statutes could be extended to cover the water obtained from
weather modification; and the use of this doctrine would offer a unified
approach to water law.13 Disadvantages have also been noted with
respect to the extension of the doctine : in most States which subscribe
to the doctrine of appropriation, the first weather modifier to comply
with the appropriation requirements could take all the moisture, and
others would have no legal rights to natural rainfall ; the measurement
of the rain falling on the land of a rain appropriator would be difficult ;
other raiiimaking in an area around the appropriator's land would
have to be prohibited if his rights were to be protected and the ques-
tions of proof if the first appropriator claimed he did not get his share
would be veiy difficult.14
Comparisons have also been made between oil and gas law and
weather modification. This analogy is based upon, the early theory that
oil and gas, like water, were fugitive and migratory substances. This
early theory evolved into two main doctrines of ownership in oil and
gas: the "nonownership theory" and the uownership-in-place theory":
The essence of the "nonownership theory" is that no person owns oil and gas
until it is produced and any person may capture the oil and gas if able to do so.
An interest in land is a prerequisite to the attempt to reduce the oil to possession.
In "ownership-in-place" States, the nature of the interest of the landowner in
oil and gas contained in his land is the same as his interest in solid minerals.
[Citations omitted.] 16
Applying either of these two theories to weather modification would
appear to be of little help in establishing rights of a weather modifier
to atmospheric water since both involve ownership interests in land.
It should be noted that the physical differences between oil and gas
and atmospheric water may render the analogy inapplicable.16
Analogies to the concepts of "developed water" and "imported
water" may prove to be more appropriate. Developed waters are
waters that "would not but for man's improvements, have become part
of a stream, or waters that would otherwise have been lost by seepage
or evaporation. As a general rule these waters are subject to appro-
priation by the parties developing or saving them." 17 One of the
factors used in determining whether water is developed water is
whether the water was added to the natural flow by the energy and
expenditure of the claimant from a source which previously had no
outlet.18 The main difficulty faced in applying this concept to weather
12 2 Kinney, "Irrigation and Water Rights" (2d ed.) 1216 cited in W. Fischer, "Weather
Mortification and the Right of Capture," 8 Natural Res. Lawyer 639, 642 (1976).
" 4 "W&ters and Water Rights" 474, (R. Clark, ed., 1970).
14 Ibid. 473-474.
lsrpbe Weather Modificntion Law Troioot Staff, University of Arizona, School of Law,
"The Loeral Implications of Atmospheric Water Resources Development and Management.")
22 (1968).
16 R. Davis. "State Regulation of Weather Modification." 12 Arizona L. Rev. 35 (1970).
w 1 "Waters and Water Rights" 341-342 (R. Clark, ed. 1970).
" The Weather Modification Law Project Staff, University of Arizona, School of Law.
"The Legal Implications of Atmospheric Water Resources Development and Management,'
23 (1968).
453
modifiers is establishing that the modifier actually developed the
water.19
Imported water, which is sometimes referred to as foreign water,,
is "water that has been imported by a user from one watershed into
another.*' 20 Imported water, like developed water, is not part of the
natural flow of water. Persons who import water are generally given
a prior right to the capture and use of such waters.21 It has been stated
that the application of the doctrine of imported water to weather
modifiers would be advantageous since imported water is frequently
exempted from the control of interstate river compacts.22 Problems
would also be presented by this analogy. The weather modifier must
show that the water he has produced has been shifted from one water-
shed to another, and he must also show that the water is imported
rather than contributory. In addition, the general question of proof,
that is establishing that the modifier actually produced the water,
would present difficulties.
LIABILITY FOR WTEATHER MODIFICATION
If a drought or a severe storm occurs after weather modification at-
tempts have occurred, issues concerning liability for damages may
arise. These issues would include causation as well as the application
of a number of theories of tort recovery including nuisance, strict lia-
bility, trespass, and negligence. Other bases of liability might be pres-
ent depending on the particular facts and circumstances attending any
specific incident. In addition, issues concerning air and water pollu-
tion could be raised. Before a general discussion of these issues is be-
gun, it would be helpful to examine briefly State statutes which dis-
cuss liability.
Ten State statutes were found which discuss liability for weather
modification. These statutes vary widely in effect and complexity.
Eight of these statutes specifically provide that the State is immune
from liability.23 Five statutes were found which provide that obtain-
ing a license for weather modification is not a defense to legal actions.24
The statutes on weather modification are stated not to affect private
contractual or legal obligations in four States.25 Three statutes pro-
vide that weather modification is not ultrahazardous 26 while three
State statutes provide that weather modification is not a trespass 27
or, in one State, not a public or a private nuisance.28 In addition, Colo-
19 For a detailed discussion of this question of proof, see W. Fischer, "Weather Modifica-
tion and the Right of Capture," 8 Natural Res. Lawyer 639, 645-651 (1976).
20 1 "Waters and Water Rights," 339 (R. Clark, ed. 1970).
21 Id.
22 The Weather Modification Law Project Staff, University of Arizona, School of Law,
"The Legal Implications of Atmospheric Water Resources Development and Management,"
29 (1968).
23 Colo. Rev. Stat. sec. 36-20-122 ; 111. Ann. Stat. ch. 14 3/4, sec. 27 ; Kan. Stat. sec.
82a-1420 ; N. Dak. Cent. Code sec. 2-07-10 ; Okla. Stat. Ann. Title 2 sec. 1418 ; Tex. Water
Code Ann. title 2 sec. 14.101 ; Wash. Rev. Code sec. 43.37.190 and Wyo. Stat. Ann. sec. 9-276.
24 Col. Rev. Stat. sec. 36-20-123; 111. Ann. Stat. ch. 14 3/4, sec. 27; Kan. Stat. sec.
82a-1420; N. Dak. Cent. Code sec. 2-07-10; Tex. Water Code Ann. title 2 sec. 14.101.
25 Okla. Stat. Ann. title 2 sec. 1418; Tex. Water Code Ann. title 2 sec. 14.101 (with
certain exceptions) ; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. sec. 43.37.190 ; Wis. Stat. Ann. sec. 19^.40.
26 111. Ann. Stat. ch. 14 3/4, sec. 27 ; N. Dak. Cent. Code sec. 2-07-10 ; Tex. Water Code
title 2 sec. 14.101.
27 111. Ann. Stat. ch. 14 3/4, sec. 27 ; N. Dak. Cent. Code sec. 2-07-10 ; Colo. Rev. Stat. sec.
36-20-123.
28 Colo. Rev. Stat. sec. 36-20-123.
454
rado and Illinois statutes provide that failure to obtain a license or
a permit for weather modification constitutes negligence 29 per se
while Wisconsin provides that unregulated weather modification
operations shall be subject to summary abatement public nuisances.30
Illinois and Xorth Dakota also provide that a person adversely
affected by weather modification shall not be prevented by a statute
on weather modification from recovering damages resulting from in-
tentional harmful actions or negligent conduct.31 Finally, West Vir-
ginia provides that any licensee who causes a drought or a heavy
downpour or storm which causes damage to land as determined by the
West Virginia Aeronautics Commission shall compensate farmers and
property owners for such damage.32
Before any case for liability for weather modification can be made,
it must first be proved that the weather modifier did in fact cause
the drought, storm, or heavy rainfall which led to the damage for
which compensation is sought.33 Due to scientific uncertainties, this
is a very heavy burden of proof for the plaintiff and is not often met.
State statutes on weather modification provide few guidelines con-
cerning causation. Of the 10 State statutes which discuss liability for
weather modification, only the West Virginia statute discusses causa-
tion and there the statute simply recites that whether or not a weather
modifier causes a drought or a storm shall be determined by the West
Virginia Aeronautics Commission.
The test which is used most often in tort law to determine whether
a causal relationship exists is the ubut for' test. This test states that
an activity is the cause in fact of a claimed consequence where the
event would not have occurred but for the conduct of the actor.34
This test has been used in some weather modification cases 35 but
"judicial experience to date has shown that proof of cause in fact is
a serious obstacle to recovery of damages from a weather modifier
and to securing injunctive relief to bar his continued operations.'' 36
Several different theories of tort liability may be argued in a
weather modification case; strict liability, nuisance, negligence, and
trespass. As noted above, some State statutes specifically allow or pro-
hibit some of these types of suits. Illinois, North Dakota, and Texas
all provide that weather modification is not ultrahazardous which in
effect bars the use of the theory of strict liability. Strict liability re-
sults when an activity is found to be ultrahazardous, which has been
defined as •"necessarily involving ... a risk of serious harm to the
person, land, or chattels of others which cannot be eliminated by the
29 Colo. Rev. Stat. sec. 36-20-123 ; 111. Ann. Stat. ch. 14 3/4, sec. 27.
30 Wis. Stat. Ann. sec. 195.40.
sl 111. Ami. Stat. ch. 14 3/4. sec. 27 ; N. Dak. Cent. Code sec. 2-07-10.
~ W. Va. Code sec. 29-2B-13.
": This question of proof is very similar to that which is faced by the weather modifies
in attempting to prove that certain waters are his since he caused them. See W. Fischer,
• Weather Modification and the Right of Capture." S Natural Res. Lawyer 639 , 645—651
(1976).
3* 4 "Waters and Water Rights" 477-47S (It. Clark, ed. 1970).
35 See. e.g. Davis and St. Amand. "Proof of Legal Causation in Weather Modification
Litigation : h'einbold v. Sumner Farmers, Inc.. and Irving P. Krick, Inc." 7 J. of Weather
cation 127 (April 197r>) ; 4 "Waters and Water Rights" 478-479 (R. Clark, ed. 19701.
6 The Weather Modification Law Project Staff. University of Arizona. School of Law.
"The Legal Implications of Atmospheric Water Resources Development and Management!
12 (1968) : set? also. R. Johnson. "Weather Modification Legal Study" 2-4, prepared for
the Weather Modification Advisory Board, Feh. 28, 1977.
455
utmost care." 37 In determining whether cloud seeding is an abnor-
mally dangerous activity, it has been stated that courts would consider
the following factors:
(a) Whether the activity involves a high degree of risk of some
harm to the person, land, or chattels of others ;
(b) Whether the gravity of the harm which may result from it
is likely to be great ;
(c) Whether the risk cannot be eliminated by the exercise of
reasonable care ;
(d) Whether the activity is not a matter of common usage;
(e) Whether the activity is inappropriate to the place where
it is carried on ; and
(/) The value of the activity to the community.38
No case has been found where a court characterized weather modi-
fication as ultrahazardous and therefore subject to strict liability;
however, this may occur in the future particularly with regard to
certain types of attempted weather modification such as that involv-
ing hurricanes.
Nuisance is another liability theory which may prove useful in
weather modification cases. Nuisance has been described as conduct
whi h . . invades an owner's interest in the use and enjoyment of
his land, and such invasion is intentional and unreasonable, negligent
or reckless or regarded as an abnormally dangerous activity.'7 39 Con-
troversies over nuisances are often resolved by balancing the utility
of the defendant's conduct with the harm it causes.40 Due to these
characteristics of nuisance, it has been regarded by some writers
. . as potentially the most useful in weather modification cases.'' 41
However, it should be noted that a Colorado statute specifically pro-
vides that weather modification is not a public or private nuisance.42
Negligence ma}T also be used as a theory for recovery in weather
modification cases. There are four main elements which are necessary
to provide a cause of action using negligence. There must be: (1) A
duty recognized by the law. which requires the actor to conform to
a certain standard of conduct; (-2) a failure to conform to the stand-
ard required: (3) a reasonably close causal connection between the
conduct and the resulting injury; and (4) actual loss or damages
suffered by the plaintiff.43 Aside from the difficulties presented by show-
ing a causal connection, another difficulty with the application of this
theory to weather modification is that a standard for performance
must be established against which the weather modifier can be
measured.
Trespass as a theory of tort liability may also prove to be applicable
to weather modification. Trespass may consist of an entry of a person
or thing upon land which is in the possession of the plaintiff.44 The
rejection of the "ad coelum" doctrine in United States v. Causby, 328
37 4 Restatement of Torts sec. 319.
38 R. Davis. "Weather Modification Litigation and Statutes." in "Weather and Climate
Modification" 773 (ed. W. Hess 1974).
» Id.
40 Prosser Torts, sec. 87. 4th ed. (1971L
° R. Davis. "Weather Modification Litigation and Statutes", in "Weather and Climate
Modification" 773 (ed. W. Hess 1974).
42 Colo. Rev. Stat. sec. 3R-20-123.
«Prosser Torts sec. 30 (4th ed. 1971).
** Id. sec. 13.
456
U.S. 256 (1945) , indicates that the flight of an airplane over a person's
land would not necessarily be considered a trespass. However, it could
be argued that the release of particles into the air by an airplane or
by a weather modification station on the ground might be considered
a trespass if they invaded the plaintiff's land. It could also be argued
that rain, hail or other precipitation produced by weather modifica-
tion would be a trespass since it did not fall there naturally but was
produced artificially.45 These arguments could be supported by citing
various cases which have found a trespass even where invisible or
microscopic particles have entered on the plaintiffs land they have
caused harm.46
In addition to the various types of tort liability discussed above,
weather modifiers may also be held liable for pollution or for adverse
environmental impacts. Weather modification not only attempts to-
change the environment by producing precipitation but also adds small
quantities of silver iodide or other artificial nucleants to the water or
other precipitation it causes. In Pennsylvania Natural Weather Asso-
ciation v. Blue Ridge Weather Modification, 44 D. & C. 2d 749 (1968) ,.
the court discussed the possible environmental damage which could be
done by weather modification and quoted a report of a bureau of re-
clamation which stated the artificial nucleants used in cloud seeding
are to varying extents poisonous. However, the court held that there
was no more than a possibility of harm and so did not issue an injunc-
tion. It should also be noted that the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., may be relevant when weather
modification is federally sponsored.47 For example an environmental
impact statement would be necessary in certain circumstances where
the Federal Government was involved.
DEFENSES WHICH MAY BE RAISED AGAINST CLAIMS OF LIABILITY
In addition to the general defense that the plaintiff has failed to
establish a cause of action, certain other defenses may be available to
a weather modifier. These would include immunity, privilege, consent
and waste.
If the weather modifier was operating under the auspices of the
Federal, State, or local government, the doctrne of sovereign immunity
from suit may be employed. The Federal Tort Claims Art, 28 U.S.C.
§ 2671 et seq., waived certain immunities of the Federal Government;
specificallv, its immunity from liability from the negligent or wrong-
ful acts of its employees who are acting within the scope of their em-
ployment. This act kept immunity for the exercise of discretionary
functions, however. It has been stated that the application of this doc-
trine to weather modification on the Federal level means that :
Federal weather modifiers, then, may expose the United States to liability for
injury careless performance of their day-to-day operations ; but likely the Federal
Government will be immune from liability for its decision to conduct weather
modification operations and for its plans relating to the operations.48
*' Note, "Legal Aspects of Weather Modification in Texas," 25 Baylor L. Rev. 501, 509-510
*n Proper Torts, sop. 13 (4th od. 1071).
47 Son R. On vis. "Wonthor Modifion tion T^mr Developments." 27 Oklahoma L. Rev. 400,
430 430 (1074) : "Wenthor Modification." hearings hefore the Subcommittee on the Envi-
ronment and the Atmosphere of the House Committee on Science and Technology. 04th
Cong.. 2d soss. 421 420 (1070). ( gta tement of ihc Natural Uosources Defense Council, Inc.)
48 4 "Waters and Water Rights" 403-404 (R. Clark, ed. 1970).
457
The doctrine of sovereign immunity with regard to the States is in a
somewhat uncertain condition although it may provide immunity to
State employed weather modifiers in some cases. It should also be
noted that eight States, Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming, statutorily mandate
that the State is immune from certain liability for weather modifica-
tion.49
The application of the doctrine of sovereign immunity to local gov-
ernments has resulted in a distinction between proprietary and govern-
mental functions. It has been stated that :
The application of this most unwieldly and unreliable test to weather modifi-
cation will not be easy. For instance, a municipality's operation of a waterworks
for supplying water to its inhabitants (which would seem at first glance to be
a governmental operation) has been held to be a proprietary operation — sub-
jecting the municipality to liability in tort. Thus, water supply augmentation
through precipitation modification may well be a part of that proprietary
function.50
Public necessity could also be argued as a defense to liability. This
defense has actually been suggested in two cases although it was not
determinative in either of them. In Slutsky v. New York, 97 N.Y.S. 2d
238 (1950), resort owners had filed for a temporary injunction to pro-
hibit New York City from engaging in experiments which attempted to
produce rain. The court held that these experiments would not inter-
fere with the plaintiffs resort business "to any appreciable extent" and
so denied the injunction. In arriving at this holding, the court empha-
sized that it must balance the competing interests and stated that "The
relief which plaintiffs ask is opposed to the general welfare and public
good. * * *" Similarly, in Pennsylvania Natural Weather Association v.
Blue Ridge Weather Modification Association, 44 D. & C. 2d 749
(1968) , the court refused to issue an injunction in the absence of proof
that damages resulted from weather modification activities but did dis-
cuss public necessity. The court there stated :
No individual has the right to determine for himself what his needs are and
produce those needs by artificial means to the prejudice and detriment of his
neighbors. However, we feel that this cannot be an unqualified right. Weather
modification takes many forms and produces, or appears to produce, desirable
effects. For example, there is fog suppression, lightning suppression, and hail
suppression. In additon, cloud seeding has been used and will continue to be
used to produce rain to relieve the water shortage in our urban areas. We feel then
that weather modification activities undertaken in the public interests, and under
the direction and control of governmental authority should and must be
permitted.51
The consent of a landowner to weather modification which may
affect his land may also be raised as a defense to liability. In addition,
a weather modifier could also attempt to raise as a defense the public
policy against waste.52
INTERSTATE ALLOCATION OF ATMOSPHERIC WATER
Weather modification activities and their results do not always fall
neatly inside State boundaries. When they do not, substantial issues
49 For citations to these statutes see footnote 23 supra.
50 4 "Waters and Water Rights" 494 (R. Clark, ed. 1970).
51 Pennsylvania Natural Weather Association v. Blue Ridge Weather Modification
Association. 44 D. & C. 2d 749, 760 (1968).
52 For a discussion of these two theories of defense see 4 "Waters and Water Rights"
497-498 (R. Clark, ed. 1970).
458
may arise; for instance, does cloud seeding in one State take water
which should have fallen in another State ? No cases have arisen which
directly deal with the issues raised by the interstate nature of weather
modification although Pennsylvania ex Tel. Township of Ayr v. Fulk,
No. 53 (Court of Common Pleas, Fulton County, Pa., Feb. 28, 1968),
did touch upon some of these issues. In that case a weather modifier who
operated a generator in Ayr Township to suppress hail in West Vir-
ginia and Maryland was convicted of violating an ordinance which
made cloud seeding an olfense. The weather modifier alleged that the
township ordinance was unconstitutional because it imposed an undue
burden on interstate commerce but the court did not agree and stated
that the ordinance was never intended to regulate commerce and that
weather modification may not even be commerce.53
More recently, a dispute has arisen between Idaho and Washington
concerning cloud seeding in Washington which allegedly takes water
from clouds which would normally discharge their water over Idaho.
Some Idaho officials have termed the cloud seeding "cloud rustling"
and threatened to file suit.54 No suits on this controversy have yet been
filed, however.
Although no court resolution of the interstate problems involved in
weather modification has been found, some States have attempted to
resolve the problem by the use of legislation or interstate compacts.
Twelve States have been found which have legislation discussing the
interstate aspects of weather modification. Eight of these have statutes
which authorize the board or commission which is responsible for
weather modification to represent the State concerning interstate
compacts or agreements on weather modification.53 Two States, Colo-
rado and New Mexico, have statutes which provide that weather modi-
fication for the benefit of other States cannot be carried on in the State
with this legislation unless the State which could be benefited also
allows weather modification to benefit the State with this legislation.56
Pennsylvania and West Virginia have statutes which provide that
their weather modification law does not authorize a person to carry out
a cloud seeding operation from these States for the benefit of another
State which forbids weather modification.57 Utah has a statute which
prohibits cloud seeding in Utah for an adjoining target State except
upon full compliance with the laws of the target State and the law of
Utah.58
Another method of overcoming the problems presented by the inter-
state nature of weather modification would be to arrive at informal
agreements with adjoining States. Several States provide that the
board which is responsible for weather modifications has the power to
enter into these agreements. However, organizations resulting from
these agreements would possess little power to make binding decisions.5*
63 For a more detailed discussion and criticism of this case see R. Davis. "Weather
Modification Litigation and Statutes," in "Weather and Climate Modification" 782-783 (ed.
W. Hess 1974).
64 B. Richards, "Rainmaking Effort Triggers Battle Over Cloud Rustling," the Washington
Post. A-5 Mar. 1. 1977.
55 Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. sec. 24-7: 111. Stat. Ann. ch. 146 3/4, sec. 9; Kan. Stat. sec.
82a-1405(f) ; New Rev. Stat. sec. 544.080(7) ; N. Mex. Stat. Ann. sec. 2-07-02.5: Okla,
Stat. Ann. sec. 1403(7) ; Tex. Water Code Ann. title 2 sec. 14.018; Wash. Rev. Code sec'
43.37.640.
MColo. Rev. Stat. sec. 36-20-118, N. Mex. Stat. Ann. sec. 75-37-12.
w Pa. Stat. Ann. title 3 sec. 1115 ; W. Va. Code sec. 29-2B-14.
m ri;.<> Code Ann. tec. 73-15-8.
59 R. Davis, "State Regulation of Weather Modification," 12 Arizona L. Rev. 35, 67 (1970).
459
I method which could also be used would be that of an interstate
ompact. Article I, § 10, cl. 3 of the U.S. Constitution states that "No
>tate shall, without the Consent of Congress, * * * enter into any
Agreement or Compact with another State. * * *" With the exception
if the limitation that the consent of Congress must be obtained, the
Constitution confirmed the right of the States to make compacts with
ach other. It has been stated that an interstate compact has the same
ffect as a treaty between sovereign powers.60
No interstate compacts specifically concerning weather modifica-
ion were found; however, some existing compacts, especially those
vhich allocate waters of interstate streams, may be applicable to
veather modification. For example, if a compact provides that half of
he waters in a river are to go to one State and half to another, the
veather modifier may have no rights in the water he has allegedly
xroduced since it would go into the river and be subject to the provi-
ions of the compact.61 It could also be argued that an agency like the
^ew York Port Authority has the authority to engage certain weather
iiodification techniques such as fog dissipation.62 Certain Supreme
^ourt decisions concerning the use of interstate waters may also
>e helpful in allocating water in clouds which pass over State
)oundaries.63
METHODS OF CONTROLLING WEATHER MODIFICATION
There are several methods by which weather modification is or could
>e controlled. These include State or local regulation, regulation by
)rofessional associations and Federal regulation. Twenty-eight States
\rere found which have some type of statute pertaining to weather
nodification. These statutes differ greatly in their content. Hawaii, for
xample, simply states that the board of land and natural resources
hall have the power "To investigate and make surveys of water re-
ources, including the possibility and feasibility of inducing rain by
rtificial or other means . . On the other hand, some States, such as
Colorado, have comprehensive laws which include such provisions as
declaration of general policy, licensing, operations affecting weather
n other States, legal recourse, and judicial review.64 The basis for the
nactment of this type of legislation is the police power. The police
ower enables a State to take action to protect and promote the health,
ifety, morals and general welfare of its people65
Some State statutes provide for control of weather modification by
Iministrative agencies. In these cases the legislature would most
kely provide some guidance for the agency and then let the agency
rovide for more specific situations by promulgating regulations.66 It
60 For a more detailed discussion of the legal effect of interstate compacts see Con-
cessional Research Service, The Constitution of the United States of America — Analysis
id Interpretation 419-423 (1973).
61 For a discussion of some of these compacts see note, "Weather Modification and the
tght of Capture," 8 Natural Res. Lawyer 639. 652-654 (1976).
02 R. Davis. "State Regulation of Weather Modification." 12 Arizona L. Rev. 35. 67 (1970).
63 See note. "Weather Modification and the Right of Capture," 8 Natural Res. Lawyer 639,
4-65o (1976).
w Copies of the weather modification statutes and a chart can be found in appendix D.
* Shapiro and Tresolini, "American Constitutional Law" 116-117 (New York 1975).
ee rphe leather Modification Law Project Staff, University of Arizona. School of Law.
'he Legal Implications of Atmospheric Water Resources Development and Management"
-88 (196S).
460
has been stated that regulation of weather modification by an adminis-
trative agency would have certain advantages including administra-
tive expertise, continuity of the administrative regulatory program,
and flexibility and completeness of control.67
State statutes would also be subject to judicial review. Although
there have been very few cases discussing weather modification, the
number of these cases has risen in recent years and there are indica-
tions that there will be even more litigation in the future. Such law-
suits, which determine the sx^ecific legal rights of individual plain-
tiffs and defendants, will provide precedents which will be helpful not
only in future cases but also in advising individuals who have not
become involved in a lawsuit what the law has been so that they may
act with some knowledge of the possible consequences.68 However,
it has been stated that judicial control alone would be incomplete and
would not have the continuity or expertise of an administrative
agency.69
A State may also attempt to control weather modification by be-
coming the proprietor of weather modification activities. Using this
method the State could use either government employees or hire
contractors to modify the weather. It has been stated that State reg-
ulation of weather modification by this contract method would have
several advantages : It would be comparatively easy to administer, it
would provide a source of funds, and it would provide a method for
enforcing payment to weather modifiers by those who receive the bene-
fit of their services.70
State regulation of weather modification in general has also been
seen to have certain advantages and disadvantages. It has been ob-
served that the advantages would include the following: First, State
statutes provide a testing ground to experiment and see what scheme
of regulation is the most successful ; second, some States have no need
for regulation of weather modification since no weather modification
occurs in these States ; and third, State agencies would be closer to the
persons regulated and those affected by weather modification than a
Federal agency. Disadvantages have also been observed in State reg-
ulation; for example, the fact that clouds are no respecters of State
boundary lines. In addition, it has been argued that State legislatures
may be susceptible to local lobbying.71
Professional associations of weather modifiers could also attempt
to regulate their members. Although this would have the advantage
of having knowledgeable persons doing the regulating and could cover
interstate situations, it would also have disadvantages. For example,
such regulators might be reluctant to impose restrictions which might
harm their business. In addition, not all weather modifiers would neces-
saril}T be members of such professional associations and their powers
of enforcement of regulations would be exceedingly limited.
67 R. Davis, "State Regulation of Weather Modification." 12 Arizona L. Rev. 35, 55 (1970).
ftS For discussions of judicial control of weather modification see R. Davis, "Strategic
for State Regulation of Weather Modification," in "Controlling the Weather" 182-194 (ed.
II. Taubenfeld 1970) ; The Weather Modification Law Project Staff, University of Arizona,
School of Law, "The Legal Implications of Atmospheric Water Resources Development and
Management" S5-86 (196S).
■ R. Davis. "State Regulation of Weather Modification," 12 Arizona L. Rev. 35, 56 (1970).
70 Id. 60-61.
n Id. 64-65.
461
COXGRESSIOXAL AUTHORITY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION TO REGULATE OR
LICENSE "WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES
Weather modification could also be controlled by Federal statute.
However, in order to enact valid legislation, Congress must find a grant
of power in the Constitution which would allow such legislation. There
are several grants of power to Congress which would be sufficient au-
thority for the regulation of weather modification activities. The most
important of these is the power given to Congress under the commerce
clause which states that "The Congress shall have Power To . . . reg-
ulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States,
and with the Indian Tribes." 72 Authority for such regulation may to
some extent also be found under the sections granting Congress fiscal
power, war power, property power and treaty power. The major em-
phasis of this section will be on the commerce clause: however, the
other powers will be discussed briefly. Prior to a discussion of the com-
merce power, it would be helpful to briefly discuss the principle of
federalism.
Federalism
Federalism is one of the basic concepts underlying the U.S.
Constitution. It has been defined as "* * * a principle of government
Which provides for the division of powers between a national govern-
ment and a collection of State governments operating over the same
geographic area." 73 The Federal Government possesses all those pow-
ers which are delegated to it either expressly or by implication by
the Constitution. As is explicitly stated in the 10th amendment, the
State governments possess those powers which are not given to the
Federal Government or denied to the States. Recent Supreme Court
cases, in particular National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S. 833
(1976), have been interpreted by some commentators as indicating a
* * resurrection of the Madisonian concept of a restricted Federal
Government resulting in a more active role for the 10th amend-
ment." 74 This recent change in interpretation, if indeed there has been
a significant change, has occurred mainly as a limitation on congres-
sional use of the commerce clause power and will be discussed in more
detail in the discussion of the commerce clause.
The commerce clause
The commerce clause has generally been interpreted broadly by the
Supreme Court and has been described as "* * * the direct source of
the most important powers which the Federal Government exercises in
peacetime, and except for the due process and equal protection clauses
of the 14th amendment, it is the most important limitation imposed by
the Constitution on the exercise of State power." 75 The use of the
commerce clause as a source of Federal power is the most relevant to
the discussion here ; however, it should be noted that the only case
found which discussed the commerce clause and weather modification
7- O S. Constitution art. I. sec. 8. cl. 3.
'■■ Chase and Ducat. "Constitutional Interpretation" 375 (St. Paul 1974).
» Note. "Constitutional Law — Tenth Amendment as an Affirmative Limitation on Com-
merce Power. National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S. S33 (1976)," 8 Toledo L. Rev.
796. R09 (1977).
" Congressional Research Service. "The Constitution of the United States of America —
Analysis and Interpretation" 142 (Washington 1973).
34-8o7 — 79 32
462
was one in which the commerce clause was discussed as a limitation on
the exercise of State power. This case, Pennsylvania ex rel. Township
of Ayr v. Fulk, No. 53 (Court of Common Pleas, Fulton County, Pa.,
Feb. 28, 1968), arose when a weather modifier who operated a gener-
ator in Ayr Township to suppress hail in West Virginia and Maryland
was convicted of violating an ordinance which made cloud seeding an
offense. The weather modifier alleged that the township ordinance was
unconstitutional because it imposed an undue burden on interstate com-
merce but the court did not agree and stated that the ordinance was
never intended to regulate commerce and that weather modification
may not even be commerce. This case has been strongly criticized as
ignoring the numerous Supreme Court cases which have interpreted
the term "commerce" very broadly and it is of questionable use as per-
suasive authority.76
The commerce clause generally. — The commerce clause was first dis-
cussed in Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. (22 U.S.) 1 (1824). This land-
mark case ai'ose when a monopoly granted by New York State on the
operation of certain vessels in its Avaters was challenged by Gibbons
who transported passengers pursuant to an act of Congress. Speaking
for the Court, Chief Justice Marshall stated :
The subject to be regulated is commerce; and our Constitution being, as was
aptly said at the bar, one of enumeration, and not of definition, to ascertain the
extent of the power, it becomes necessary to settle the meaning of the word. The
counsel for the appellee would limit it to traffic, to buying and selling, or the
interchange of commodities, and do not admit that it comprehends navigation.
This would restrict a general term, applicable to many objects, to one of its sig-
nifications. Commerce, undoubtedly, is traffic, but is something more : it is inter-
course. At 189.
Chief Justice Marshall also addressed the question of what is the
power to regulate commerce and stated :
It is the power to regulate; that is, to prescribe the rule by which commerce
is to be governed * * *. The power of Congress, then, comprehends navigation
within the limits of every State in the union; so far as that navigation may be,
in any manner, connected with "commerce with foreign nations, or among, the
several States, or with the Indian tribes." At 190-197.
Although the commerce power was interpreted more narrowly dur-
ing the early 1930's," the expansive interpretation was soon evident
again. Several cases were decided by the Supreme Court in 1942 dis-
cussing the commerce clause. In United States v. Wrighticood Dairy
Co., 315 U.S. 110, 119 (1942), the Supreme Court stated that :
The commerce power is not confined in its exercise to the regulation of com-
merce among the States. It extends to tbose activities intrastate which so affect
interstate commerce, or the exertion of the power of Congress over it. as to
make regulation of them appropriate means to the attainment of a legitimate
end, the effective execution of the granted power to regulate interstate com-
merce * * * the marketing of a local product in competition with that of a like
commodity moving interstate may so interfere with the interstate commerce or
its regulation as to afford a basis for congressional regulation of the intrastate
activity.
78 Spp R. Davis. "Weather Modification Litigation and Statutes'* in "Weather and Climate
Modification" 782-783 fed. W. IIoss 1074).
77 See e.g., Schccter Poultry Corp. \. United States, 295 U.S. 405 (1935).
463
This same rationale was used in Wickard v. Filbwm, 317 U.S. Ill
(1942), where the Supreme Court upheld Federal commodity regula-
tions which applied to a farmer who was growing wheat for his own
use. The Court concluded there that even though this particular
amount of wheat was trivial, when combined with that of others in
similar situations, it could be sufficiently competitive with wheat in
interstate commerce to justify its regulation.
More recently, the Court in Perez v. United States, 402 U.S. 146
(1971), upheld title II of the Consumer Credit Protection Act which
prohibited certain extortionate credit transactions. The Court found
that although the transactions in question in this case were purely
intrastate, they could adversely affect interstate commerce and thus
their regulation was a permissible congressional exercise of its powers
under the commerce clause.
As is exemplified by these cases, the power of regulation given to
Congress under the commerce clause may deal with the channels of
commerce, instrumentalities of commerce, activities affecting com-
merce and articles of commerce. Since the devices used in weather
modification would most likely involve commercial marketing, it is
likely that weather modification could be regulated since its instru-
ments would probably be in interstate commerce. In addition, weather
modification activities could by themselves affect commerce. An even
stronger case could be made that weather modification can be reg-
ulated under the commerce clause since it would have an affect on navi-
gable waters.
The commerce clause arid the regulation of navigable waters. — There
is a line of cases stretching from Gibbons v. Ogden concerning con-
gressional authority under the commerce clause to regulate navigable
waters. As was quoted above in Gibbons Chief Justice Marshall stated
that commerce " * * * comprehends navigation within the limits of
every State * * *." The congressional regulation of waterways was
further elaborated in Pennsylvania v. Wheeling & Belmont Bridge
Co., 13 How. (54 U.S.) 518 (1852), and The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall
(77 U.S.) 557 (1871). As a result of this power over navigation, Con-
gress has also acquired the right to develop hydroelectric power 78 and
to legislate in the area of flood control. In United States v. Appala-
chian Electric Potver Co., 311 U.S. 377 (1940), the Supreme Court
discussed " * * * the scope of the Federal commerce power in relation
to conditions in licenses, required by the Federal Power Commission,
for the construction of hydroelectric dams in navigable rivers of the
United States." At 398. 'Discussing the power of the United States
over its waters, the Court stated :
, In our view, it cannot properly be said that the constitutional power of the
United States over its waters is limited to control for navigation. By navigation
respondent means no more than operation of boats and improvement of the water-
way itself. In truth the authority of the United States is the regulation of com-
merce on is waters. Navigability, in the sense just stated, is but a part of this
whole. Flood protection, watershed development, recovery of the cost of improve-
ments through utilization of power are likewise parts of commerce control. As
respondent soundly argues, the United States cannot by calling a project of its
own "a multiple purpose dam" give to itself additional powers, but equally truly
United States v. Chandler-Dunlar Co., 229 U.S. 53 (1913).
464
the respondent cannot, by seeking to use a navigable waterway for power genera-
tion alone, avoid the authority of the Government over the stream. At 426.78
Since weather modification activities could have an effect upon the
waterfiow of navigable waters, they thereby would be subject of con-
gressional regulation under the commerce power. This is particularly
true in the case of activities such as cloud seeding where the activities
of weather modifiers could potentially cause flooding and may well
affect the watershed.
Limitations on the commerce power. — An argument could be made
that Congress does not have authority under the commerce clause to
regulate weather modification activities. States and localities could
argue that such regulation would be an unconstitutional infringement
of the rights of the States under the 10th amendment. In United States
v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100> (1941), the Supreme Court characterized the
10th amendment as stating "* * * but a truism that all is retained which
has not been surrendered." At 124. This was interpreted by the Su-
preme Court in Fry v. United States, 421 U.S. 542 (1975) :
While the Tenth Amendment has been characterized as a truism stating merely
that all is retained which has not been surrendered, * * * it is not without sig-
nificance. The Amendment expressly declares the constitutional policy that Con-
gress may not exercise power in a fashion that impairs the States' integrity or
their ability to function effectively in a federal system (citation omitted).
The Supreme Court in National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S.
833 (1976), quoted this language from Fry with approval. National
League of Cities held that Congress may not exercise its power to
regulate interstate commerce so as to force directly upon the States
its choice as to how essential decisions regarding the conduct of inte-
gral governmental functions are to be made. More specifically, the
Court held that the 1974 amendments to the Fair Labor Standards Act
which extended the statutory minimum wage and maximum hours
provisions to employees of States and their subdivisions was unconsti-
tutional in that it exceeded congressional power under the commerce
clause.
It could be argued that National League of Cities indicates that the
Supreme Court is placing limitations on the power of Congress under
the commerce clause and that a more narrow reading of this clause
would make Federal regulation of weather modification questionable.
However, it is unlikely that such an argument would be successful.
The majority opinion in National League of Cities, despite its broad
language, did accommodate most of the previous Supreme Court cases
where broad congressional power to regulate commerce was upheld. In
addition, the Court noted that "* * * there are attributes of sovereign-
ty attaching to every State government which may not be impaired by
Congress * * *" and that "* * * (o)ne undoubted attribute of State
sovereignty is the States' power to determine the wages which shall be
paid to those whom they employ * * *"' At 845. It is unlikely that
weather modification would be considered to be one of these undoubted
attributes of State sovereignty. It should also be noted that four jus-
w See also Douglas v. Seacoast Products, 431 U.S. 26."> (1977) where the Supreme Court
Struck clown a Virginia statute which limited the right of nonresidents to catch fish in
Virginia waters since it conflicted with Federal requirements. The Supreme Court stated:
"While appellant may he correct in arguing that at earlier times in our history, there was
Bome flouht whether Congress had power under the commerce clause to regulate the taking
of fish in State waters, there can be no question today that such power exists where there
is some effect on interstate commerce." At 2S1-282 (footnote omitted).
4.65
tices dissented from the majority opinion in National League of Cities
and in a concurring opinion Justice Blackmun stated :
I may misinterpret the Court's opinion, but it seems to me that it adopts a
balancing approach, and does not outlaw Federal power in areas such as environ-
mental protection, where the Federal interest is demonstrably greater and ^Yhere
State facility compliance with imposed Federal standards would be essential.
At 856.
An area such as weather modification would seem to be more akin to
environmental protection than to minimum wage laws. And although
States have enacted legislation concerning weather modification, the
fact that weather patterns often have national effects would seem to
make the imposition of Federal standards arguably as logical as they
are in the area of environmental protection.80
Fiscal poioers
Congress is given the power to tax and provide for the general wel-
fare of the United States in article I, section 8, clause 1 of the Consti-
tution. This section specifically states:
The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and
Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Wel-
fare of the United States * * *
This power to tax has been interpreted broadly and the Supreme
Court has held that the power of Congress to tax to provide for the
common welfare is not limited by the other direct grants of legislative
power found in the Constitution.81 However, although the power of
Congress was not found to be limited by other direct grants in United
States v. Butler, the Supreme Court also indicated there that the power
to tax for the general welfare was limited by the 10th amendment. The
limitation of the 10th amendment on this power was narrowly inter-
preted in Steward Machine Go. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548 (1937). In Ste-
ward, the Court upheld the Social Security Act and found that the
relief of unemployment was a legitimate object of Federal expenditure
under the general welfare provision.
Federal grants-in-aid wmich are conditioned upon State compliance
with certain regulations have also been found constitutional. In Okla-
homa v. Civil Service Commission, 330 U.S. 127 (1947), the Supreme
Court found that section 12(a) of the Hatch Act was constitutional
and that it did not violate the 10th amendment by diminishing the
amount of a Federal grant-in-aid for the construction of highways
if the State failed to remove a member of the State highway com-
mission from office. The highway commissioner had been found to
have taken an active part in political campaigns while a member of the
commission. In arriving at this holding, the Supreme Court stated :
While the United States is not concerned and has no power to regulate local
political activities as such of State officials, it does have power to fix the terms
80 Numerous commentators have discussed the implications of National League of Cities.
For examples see. L. Tribe. "Unravelling National League of Cities : The New Federalism
and Affirmative Rights to Essential Government Services." 90 Harv. L. Rev. 1065 (1977) ;
B. Matsumoto. "National League of Cities — From Footnote to Holding — Stnte Immunity
from Commerce Clause Regulation." 1977 Ariz. St. L. J. 35 (1977) ; Note, "Constitutional
Law — 10th Amendment as an Affirmative Limitation on Commerce Power, National League
of Cities v. XJsery, 426 U.S. 833 (1976), 8 Toledo L. Rev. 796 (1977) ; Note, "The Re-
emergence of State Sovereignty as a Limit on Congressional Power Under the Commerce
Clause." 28 Case W. Reserve L. Rev. 166 (1977).
81 United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1, 65-66 (1936).
466
upon which its money allotments to the State shall be disbursed. The Tenth
Amendment does not forbid the exercise of this power in the way that Congress
has proceeded in this case * * * The end sought by Congress through the Hatch
Act is better public service by requiring those who administer funds for national
needs to abstain from active political partisanship. So even though the action
taken by Congress does have effect upon certain activities within the State, it has
never been thought that such effect made the Federal act invalid. * * * We do not
see any violation of the State's sovereignty in the hearing or order. Oklahoma
adopted the "simple expedient" of not yielding to what she urges is Federal
coercion * * * The offer of benefits to a State by the United States dependent
upon cooperation by the State with Federal plans, assumedly for the general
welfare, is not unusual. [Citations omitted.] At 143-144.
Given this precedent, it is likely that Congress would be able to con-
dition grants for weather modification activities on the following of
certain regulations without raising constitutional problems.82
"War potoers
The U.S. Constitution article I, section 8, clause 1 provides in rele-
vant part that "The Congress shall have the Power To * * * provide
for the common defence * * *" In addition clause 11 provides that
Congress shall have the power to declare war. These specific grants of
power have been used by the Supreme Court to uphold certain con-
gressional acts.83 The Supreme Court has also found that there was an
inherent power to make war. In United States v. Curtiss-W right Corp.,
299 U.S. 304 (1936) , the Supreme Court stated :
• * * that the investment of the Federal Government with the powers of ex-
ternal sovereignty did not depend upon the affirmative grants of the Constitution.
The power to declare and wage war, to conclude peace, to make treaties, to main-
tain diplomatic relations with other sovereignties, if they had never been men-
tioned in the Constitution, would have vested in the Federal Government as neces-
sary concomitants of nationality. At 318.
It is likely that the war power could be used to find congressional
power to regulate weather modification since weather modification has
potential military use. Also, Congress has used the war power as a basis
for the regulation of atomic energy and electricitv. For example, in
Pauling v. McElroy, 164 F. Supp. 390 (D.D.C. 1958), aff'd 278 F. 2d
252 (I960), cert, denied, 364 U.S. 835 (1960), the district court found
that the Atomic Energy Act was constitutional and stated: "The Act
is a valid exercise of the authority of Congress to promote and protect
the national defense and safety under the constitutional war power."
At 393. And in Ashwander v. Tennessee Y alley Authority, 297 U.S. 288
(1935), the Supreme Court upheld the construction of Wilson Dam as
a valid exercise "* * * by the Congress of its war and commerce
powers, that is. for the purposes of national defense and the improve-
ment of navigation.'' At 326.
Property power
Article TV. section 3, clause 2 of the Constitution provides that "The
Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules
and Regulations respectinir the Territory or other Property belonging
to the United States * * *" This power has been interpreted broadly
and State legislation has been held not to interfere with the power of
t2 Pot n mnrp rlotnilorl discussion of the fiscal power see K. Dam, "The American Fiscal
Constitution." 44 TJ. Chi. L. Rov. 271 H077).
■ Sr«. Lichter v. United States, 334 U.S. 742 (1048).
467
Congress under this clause.84 One of the most recent pronouncements
of the Supreme Court concerning the property power of Congress was
in Kleppe v. New Mexico, 426 U.S. 529 (1976) . In Kleppe the Supreme
Court held that the Wild Free-roaming Horses and Burros Act was
a constitutional exercise of congressional power under the property
clause. In arriving at this holding the Court stated :
* * * the Clause, in broad terms, gives Congress the power to determine what
are "needful" rules "respecting" the public lands * * * And while the furthest
reaches of the power granted by the Property Clause have not yet been defini-
tively resolved, we have repeatedly observed that "(t)he power over the public
land thus entrusted to Congress is without limitations" * * * The decided cases
have supported this expansive reading. It is the Property Clause, for instance,
that provides the basis for governing the Territories of the United States. And
even over public land within the States, "(t)lie general Government doubtless
has a power over its own property analogous to the police power of the several
States, and the extent to which it may go in the exercise of such power is meas-
ured by the exigencies of the particular case." [Citations omitted.] At 539-540.
The property clause could be used to regulate weather modification
over public lands. As one commentator has stated :
Superficially the power over property might not seem the most promising source
of power to regulate weather modification. In the western states, though, such
a high percentage of the land area is owned or controlled by the federal govern-
ment that regulation of weather modification over or affecting them would, in
many cases, effectively control weather modification in many of the areas where
such activities are apt to be conducted.85
Treaty power
Article II, section 2. clause 2 of the Constitution provides that the
President "* * * shall have Power, by and with the consent of the Sen-
ate, to make Treaties, * * *?? Congress is often able to enact legislation
supplementing treaties which it may not have the power to reach other-
wise. As one commentator has stated :
In a word, the treaty-power cannot purport to amend the Constitution by add-
ing to the list of Congress' enumerated powers, but having acted, the consequence
will often be that it has provided Congress with an opportunity to enact measures
which independently of a treaty Congress could not pass ; the only question
fcnat can be raised as to such measures will be whether they are "necessary and
proper" measures for the carrying of the treaty in question into operation.86
It is possible, then, that if a treaty concerning weather modification
were made, Congress could regulate weather modification activities by
enacting legislation supplementing the treaty.
Conclusion
The commerce clause as it has been interpreted by the Supreme
Court would provide sufficient authority for Congress to enact legisla-
tion regulating weather modification activities. Although the Supreme
Court did place certain limitations on the commerce clause in National
League of Cities, it is unlikely that this case would so limit the reach
of the commerce power as to effect weather modification regulation. As
one commentator has noted "* * * the potential of the case may be
84 See Congressional Research Service. "The Constitution of the United States of
America — Analysis and Interpretation" 848 (Washington 1973). See also Kleppe v. New
Mexico, 426 U.S. 529. 546 (1976).
85 R. Davis. "The Legal Implications of Atmospheric Water Resources Development and
Management," 102 (Report to the Bureau of Reclamation, October 1968).
88 Congressional Research Service. "The Constitution of the United States of America-
Analysis and Interpretation" 848 (Washington 1973).
468
quite restrained.'- 87 Authority for the regulation of weather modifica-
tion might also be found in other powers of Congress including the
fiscal power, war power, property power, and treaty power. However,
the use of these powers may not provide as far-reaching authority as
is given under the commerce clause. For example, under the property
power, Congress would be limited to regulation of weather modifica-
tion activities on public lands. Some commentators have also argued
that the National League of Cities decision may serve to limit other
congressional powers, such as the fiscal power, hi addition to limiting
the commerce power.66 It is unlikely that even if the National League
of Cities holding were extended to other sources of congressional
power that it would affect weather modification regulation.
International*
The major focus on the potential legal problems associated with
weatlier modification activities in the United States has been on the
domestic repercussions. However, there is increasing attention and
interest in international involvement and implications.^ The National
Weather xUodification Policy Act of 1976 lJ° contains a congressional
finding that: "Weather modification programs may have long-range
and unexpected effects on existing climatic patterns which are not con-
fined by national boundaries.*'" Iwo of the stated purposes of the act
are: "(6) to develop both national and international mechanisms de-
signed to mhiiniize conflicts which may arise with respect to peaceful
uses of weather modification; and (7) to integrate the results of exist-
ing experience and studies in weather modification activities into
model codes and agreements for regulation of domestic and interna-
tional weather modification activities." The Secretary of Commerce
is directed to conduct a study which is to include, among other things,
" (10) a review and analysis of the necessity and feasibility of negotiat-
ing an international agreement concerning the peaceful uses of
weather modification; and (11) formulation of one or more options
for a model international agreement concerning the peaceful uses of
weather modification activities ; and a review and analysis of the neces-
sity and feasibility of negotiating such an agreement." Thus, because
the atmospheric processes producing weather operate independently of
national boundaries, weather modification is inherently an interna-
tional problem.91
Any international concern about weather modification should in-
clude attention to the international legal issues :
Serious international questions have arisen in conjunction with the capability
to modify the weather. For example, do countries have the right to take uni-
lateral action in all weather modification activities? What liability might a
country incur for its weather modification operations which destroy life and
property in a foreign State? On what theory could aud should that State base its
*Daniel Uill Zafren, Assistant Chief, American Law Division, Congressional Research
Sprvice.
87 Id. at S. 10 (Washington 1976).
88 See note, "The Re-Einergence of State Sovereignty as a Limit on Congressional Power
Under the Commerce Clause, ' 2S Case Western Reserve L. Rev, 106, 19S-199 U977).
w See ch. 10.
80 15 U.S.C. | 330 note. Public Law 94-490, 90 Stat. 2359.
" Note. -Weather Modihcation : A Modest Proposal,' 4 Ga. J. of Infl & Comp. L. 159,
104 (1974).
469
claim? The international ramifications of weather modification are obvious, and
in time may lead to potentially major international controversy.92
Actually, some of the international legal issues are similar to those
in the domestic realm which pertain to interstate activities or dam-
ages. Because of national sovereignty over airspace, nations are likely
to assert rights of control over clouds and other weather phenomena in
their national airspace. On the one hand, this involves the right to
"use" the weather over their territory. On the other hand, it also raises
a claim to "receive" weather due to arrive from another country.93
The domestic law concerning weather modification has been de-
scribed herein as being "unsettled." International law governing this
subject is barely in the formative stage. It is not even clear at this
point whether there will be a separate particular body of international
law on or pertaining to weather modification, or whether international
rules and regulations governing weather modification will merely
become part of a larger and more general growing area of interna-
tional law, namely international environmental law.
As an example of an international approach dealing directly with
weather modification as a separate consideration, on March 26, 1975,
the United States and Canada entered into an agreement relating to
the exchange of information on weather modification activities 94
which recognizes "the desirability of the development of international
law relating to weather modification activities that have transbound-
ary effects." This bilateral agreement, however, is limited to unilateral
reporting and consultation. The right to act unilaterally is preserved,
and article VII even states :
Nothing herein relates to or shall be construed to affect the question of re-
sponsibility or liability for weather modification activities, or to imply the exist-
ence of any generally applicable rule of international law.
As an example of an international approach which deals with
weather modification in the broader concept of environment, on May
18. 1977, the United States signed the Convention on the Prohibition
of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification
Techniques,95 which will enter into force after ratified by 20 signatory
nations, in which each State party "undertakes not to engage in mili-
tary or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques
having widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects as the means of de-
struction, damage or injury to any other State party."
The primary practical international legal problem is probably that
of liability for transnational injury or damage. Such a situation could
conceivably arise involving the United States either directly or in-
directly in a number of general fact situations :
1. Injury or damage in another nation caused by weather modi-
fication^ activities executed within the United States;
2. Injury or damage in another nation caused by weather modi-
fication activities executed in that nation or a third nation by the
United States or a citizen of the United States ;
P2 Comment. "Wentbpr Gpnesis and Wpnther Neutralization : A New Approach to Weather
Modification." 6 Olif. W. Tnt'l L.J. 412. 414 (1976).
93 Taubenfeld. "Wentbpr Modification and Control: Some International Implications," 55
Calif. L. Bev. 493. 497 n 967) .
p< TTAS 90r>« OR TTST 540.
P516 Int'l Materials S8 (1977). It has been submitted by the President to the Senate
for approval. See Exec. K, 95th Cong., 2d sess.
470
,3. Injury or damage in another nation caused by weather modi-
fication activities executed in an area not subject to the jurisdic-
tion of any nation (e.g., over the high seas), by the United States
or a citizen thereof ; and
4. Injury or damage to an alien or an alien's property within the
United States caused by weather modification activities executed
within the United States.
Different and highly complex legal considerations might be present
with any one (or combination) of such variable factors as:
1. The purpose and motivation of the weather modification activity :
(a) Was it performed for peaceful or hostile purposes?
(b) Was it originated for some public interest or a private
interest ?
2. The authority and character of the weather modifier:
(a) Is the weather modifier a Federal or State governmental
agency, a private party under contract from the Federal or a
State government, or a private party engaged in a private
pursuit ?
(b) Has the modifier complied with all necessary prerequisites
surrounding that particular activity (e.g., license, notification,
and environmental impact statement ) ?
(c) Has the other nation consented to or requested the weather
modification ?
(d) Has the weather modifier acted pursuant to the authority
granted and in a competent and acceptable manner ?
3. The forum chosen for commencement of any legal action, and the
defendant(s) chosen:
(a) Does the plaintiff have standing to bring such a suit ?
(b) Does the forum recognize a cause of action upon which the
suit might be brought ?
(e) Is proper jurisdiction obtained over the defendant (s) ?
(d) If suit is brought against a governmental entity, is a de-
fense of sovereign immunity available?
(e) If suit is brought in a foreign nation and judgment ob-
tained, can or would it be recognized and enforceable in the
United States?
(/) What are the conflicts of law decisions of the forum ?
4. The type and extent of injury or damage sustained :
(a) Can it be proven that the weather modification activity
caused the injury or damage complained of ?
(b) Is the injury or damage slight compared with any benefits
resulting from the activity?
(c) Can any of the injury or damage have been avoided or
foreseen, by either party?
(d) What legal analogies can be drawn ?
This listing is not exhaustive, but it is readily apparent that legal
considerations can vary drastically depending on the facts and circum-
stances surrounding any particular incident and questions pertaining
to legal liability therefor. Following is a brief description of some of
the international law principles that might arise, both public and
private, in any given situation.
471
CERTAIN HOSTILE USES OF WEATHER MODIFICATION ARE PROHIBITED
Besides the prohibition against the use of environmental modifica-
tion techniques contained in the Convention on the Prohibition of Mili-
tary or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Tech-
niques as to the military or other hostile use of environmental modifi-
cation techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects in
another nation which is a party to that Convention, other sources of in-
ternational law can be pointed to as declaring similar principles. For
example, the International Committee of the Red Cross Protocol II
after the Second Diplomatic Conference of the Reaffirmation and De-
velopment of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed
Conflicts, protects the natural environment from combat methods that
cause widespread, long-term and severe damage. Article 28 states : "It
is forbidden to employ methods or means of combat which are intended
or may be expected to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage
to the natural environment." 96 Extreme forms of weather modifica-
tion, if used as a weapon, could arguably also be in contravention of the
"laws of war" as being in contravention of the principles of military
necessity, humanity, proportionality, and discrimination.
NATIONS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDUCT WHICH CAUSES
INJURY OR DAMAGE IN OR TO OTHER NATIONS
On the issue of liability, a continuous flow of international decisions,
conventions, and practices indicates acceptance of a standard of strict
liability among states for damage caused by or deprivations resulting
from manipulation of environmental variables. This standard has been
developed by extension of three well-known cases : The Trail Smelter
arbitration, in which an international tribunal found Canada liable for
fumes emanating from a smelter located in British Columbia and do-
ing damage in the State of Washington ; the Corfu, Channel case, in
which the International Court of Justice held Albania responsible
under international law for damage to British ships from mine explo-
sions in Albanian territorial waters ; and the Lac Lannoux arbitration,
where it was said that France would be strictly liable if, due to its hy-
droelectric utilization of a French lake, damage resulted to waters
draining into Spain. Strict liability among states has similarly found
expression in several multilateral conventions. Such liability has usu-
ally been enforced in the first instance by and against states, leaving
to national legal systems its assertion directly against private parties.97
The Trail Smelter case contains the following often-quoted
language :
Under principles of international law, as well as of the law of the United States,
no State has the right to use or permit the use of its territory in such a manner
as to cause injury by fumes in or to the territory of another or the properties or
persons therein, when the case is of serious consequence and the injury is estab-
lished by clear and convincing evidence." 99
98 Cantrell, "Civilian Protection in Internal Armed Conflicts : The Second Diplomatic
Conference." 11 Texas Int'l L.J. 305. 308. 326-327 (1976).
97 Note. "New Perspectives on International Environmental Law." 82 Yale L..T. 1059.
1665-1666 (1073). The Trail Smelter case (United States v. Canada), 3 TT.N.R.I.A. A. 1038
(1041). 35 Am. J. Int'l L. 684 (1041). The Corfu Channel case. T10401 I.C.J.4. The Lake
Lannoux case. 12 U.N.R.I.A.A. 281 (1057), 52 Am. J. Int'l L. 156 (1050).
9S It should be noted, however, that there is commentary to the effect that the implica-
tions of this case are not as they seem to be. See. Nanda, "The Establishment of Interna-
tional Standards for Transnational Injury," 60 Iowa L. Rev. 1080, 1007 (1075).
472
Further diplomatic exchanges over incidents such as compensation
paid by the United States for the Japanese fishermen subject to exces-
sive radiation in the 1954 hydrogen bomb tests in the Marshall Island
Trust Territories, the exchange of notes between Japan and the United
States involving the 1958 U.S. Pacific nuclear tests, and the exchange
of notes between Mexico and the United States involving pollution of
Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico, have been pointed to as effectively
extending the doctrine of state responsibility set forth in the Trail
Smelter case." One recent commentator describes this as an unformu-
lated principle in international law that is called the "principle of
neighborship." "It is clear, once we formulate it, that the principle does
impose limitations on a state's right to adversely affect the territorial
sovereignty of its neighbors by acts carried out in its own territory.1
NATIONS ARE LIABLE FOR INJURIES SUSTAINED BY ALIENS WITHIN THEIR
TERRITORY CAUSED BY TORTIOUS CONDUCT IN VIOLATION OF INTERNA-
TIONAL LAW
"A state is responsible under international law for injury to an
alien caused by conduct subject to its jurisdiction, that is attributable
to the state and wrongful under international law." 2 If the conduct
is not wrongful under international law, the alien would in most in-
stances have the same remedies and recourse as those available to citi-
zens of the United States,3 and be subject to the same defenses.4
NATIONS OR ITS CITIZENS MAY BE LIABLE FOR INJURY AND DAMAGE THEY
CAUSED TO CITIZENS OF ANOTHER NATION OCCURRING IN THAT NATION
If the citizen of the foreign nation is injured in that nation by torti-
ous conduct attributable to the United States or one of its citizens, the
injured party would have the option of bringing a cause of action
within that country if jurisdiction can be obtained and such a suit is
permitted there, or by bringing suit within the United States in an ap-
propriate forum. Private litigation between citizens of two different
nations can produce a host of legal issues. For example, a conflicts of
law problem would arise in that the tribunal called upon to determine
the matter would have to choose which nation's laws (or political sub-
division thereof ) would apply to the situation.5 If the litigation in-
volved a citizen of another nation and the United States, local law
w Nanda, "The Establishment of International Standards for Transnational Injury," 60
Iowa L. Rev. 10S9. 1098-1100 (1975).
1 Elkind, "Footnote to the Nuclear Test Cases : Abuse of Right — A Blind Alley for En-
vironmentalists," 9 Vand. J. Transnational L. 57 (1976). This same commentator criticizes
the International Court of Justice for sidestepping the necessity of deciding whether nu-
clear resting which causes fallout on neighboring territory is lawful in the 1975 nuclear
test cases (Australia v. France, New Zealand v. France).
2 Restatement (second) of the Law "Foreign Relations Law of the United States," sec.
164<1 t (19.-1).
»42 T\S.C. sec. 1981 (1970 ed.) grants all persons within the jurisdiction of the United
States the right to sue. Treaties of friendship, commerce and navigation, usually also grant
such a ripht. For example, see the Treatv of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation Between
the United states and Japan (1953), 4 U.S.T. 2083.
4 If a United States citizen would be foreclosed from pursuing a claim for damages be-
cause of the defense of sovereign immunity, as an example, an alien would likewise be
bn rred.
« See, e.g., S. C. McCaffrey, "Pollution Suits Between Citizens of the Republic of Mexico
ami the United States : A Study in Private International Law" (1976), at 34-35, 106.
473
would probably be determinative. "Generally, international law gov-
erns the relations of sovereign states. Therefore, private parties have
no standing to espouse a claim in the international system. Usually,
the only direct recourse for an injured private party against a foreign
nation is through that nation's municipal law. If no satisfaction can be
obtained in local courts, then only the nation of the injured party may
demand redress by the foreign nation for any alleged violation of its
duty under international law.r 6
6 Comment, "State Responsibility to Espouse Claims of Nationals Based on Contracts
With Foreign Nations," 2 N.C.J. Int'l & Comm. Reg. 38, 39 (1977).
CHAPTER 12
ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION
<By Warren Yiessman, Jr., Senior Specialist in Engineering- and Public Works,
Congressional Research Service)
Introduction
Several weather modification processes have economic implications
of great significance. Many sectors of agriculture, industry, and com-
merce may reap benefits or sustain losses as a result of shifts from his-
toric weather trends. The difficulty is that until the technology is more
highly developed and control systems perfected to permit reliable pre-
dictions of outcomes, attempts to quantify benefits and costs will, in
many cases, be more academic than practical.
The long-term potential for economic gains through weather modi-
fication cannot be denied. For example, studies sponsored by the Bureau
of Reclamation (11)73) of the potential increase in water supply from
operational weather modification in the Upper Missouri River Basin
indicate that seeding winter orographic storms in headwater areas
could provide as much as 1.8 million acre-feet of new water annually.1
In the Yellowstone subbasin, the estimated potential is 536,000 acre-
feet per year. Table 1 summarizes results of the study. These estimates
are based on an assumed October-through- April cloud-seeding period.
If seeding were extended through May and early June, a further incre-
ment of 20 to 25 percent could become available provided that May-
June precipitation is increased in proportion to October- April pre-
cipitation. The cost of providing this new water is estimated to be $2.50
per acre-foot.2
1 U.S. Department of Interior. Water for Management Team, "Report on Water for Energy
in the Northern Great Plains Area with Emphasis on the Yellowstone River Basin," Wash-
ington. D.C., January 197o.
2 Ibid.
(475)
476
TABLE 1— POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL WATER TO THE UPPER MISSOURI BASIN BY WEATHER MODIFICATION
Weather modification
Average —
Drainage
annual
Area
Incremental
area
runoff
affected
runoff
(square
(1,000
(1,000
miles)
acre-ft)
miles)
acre-ft)
Upper Missouri tributaries:
Milk River at Milk River, Alberta
1 036
278
157
I
Marias River near Shelby
3 242
728
491
74
Teton River near Dalton
1 308
118
212
22
Sun River near Vaughn
1,854
579
736
85
3, 663
9, 973
767
Rnhtatal
954
Yellowstone:
Yellowstone River at Billings
11,795
5,311
5,161
536
Wind River at Boysen Reservoir
7, 701
997
1,964
126
Greybull River at Meeteetse
681
237
512
46
1,538
797
1,501
126
Subtotal
834
Other
49
Total, Upper Missouri (above Sioux City, Iowa) 1, 837
Source of data: "Twelve Basin Investigation," prepared for USBR by North American Weather Consultants, vol. I,
Dec. 31, 1973.
The nature of direct benefits from increased precipitation is
obvious, but many indirect benefits and costs are more elusive and sug-
gest that further study of the sociological, legal, and environmental im-
plications of weather modification is needed and should be accelerated.
Economic Setting
To place the economic aspects of weather modification in better per-
spective, a review of the operational status of the principal modification
processes will be useful : 3
1. Dispersion of cold fog and seeding of winter orographic storms al-
ready have limited operational capability.
2. Dispersal of warm fog, modification of precipitation from con-
vective systems, and hail suppression are on the threshold of opera-
tional capability.
3. [Modification of major storm systems to minimize damage from
wind and flooding, lightning suppression, and modification of torna-
does are currently hopes for the future.
Considering the state of the art as summarized above, it is not difficult
to realize the tenuity of conclusive economic analyses.
Constraints on reliable quantification of benefits and costs associated
with weather modification practices are related not only to the present
uncertainty of technology but also to the complex nature of legal and
economic aspects of externality problems.4' 5 For example, decisions re-j
garding the development of facilities to enhance agricultural produc-
tion through more efficient use of water on one's own land are essen-
tially independent of imposing costs on others or on bestowing benefits
8 Crutchfield. James A.. "Weather Modification : The Economic Potential." draft of papej
prepared for Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Dnfj
verslty of Washington. Seattle. Wash., May 1977.
* Lackner, T. ().. et al„ "Precipitation Modification," National Technical Information
Service, PB 201534, Springfield, Va., July 1071. pp. vill-l to VIII-14.
* Fleagle, R. O., "Weather Modification — Science and Public Policy," University of Wash-
ington Press, Seattle, Wash., 1978, pp. 31-40.
477
on others for which there is no return. Counter to this is the situation
wherein weather modification is employed as the vehicle for such im-
provement. In this case, increased precipitation could benefit farmers
not sharing in payment for the program but impose hardships and
costs on others. For example, more rainy days would be detrimental to
operators of outdoor recreational facilities. Considering this, it is ap-
parent that collective action will be required for effective weather
modification. Unfortunately, development of the appropriate institu-
tions and laws, and clarification of legal liability issues, will likely be
a slow process, requiring an unusual degree of cooperation and public-
spirited effort.
Finally, it should be recognized that weather modification benefits
are bounded by the cost of achieving the same objectives with the "next
best" alternative.6 For example, crop yields could be increased through
the importation of water to deficient areas, modified use of agricultural
chemicals, or use of improved plant varieties.
The following sections present a summary of the economic aspects
of weather modification procedures, a review of methodology for eco-
nomic analyses, and a discussion of case studies of the benefits and
costs of several operational programs.
Economic Aspects of Weather Modification Procedures
fog dispersal
The impact of adverse weather conditions on transportation systems
is well known. Of particular significance is fog. About 97 percent of all
scheduled airline nights are completed each year, but of the remain-
ing 3 percent about one-half are canceled because of fog. The percent-
age is small, but as noted by Beckwith 7 the cost is very large. He points
out that during 1964, more than 800 million airline-miles were flown
in the United States and that gross revenues generated during that
period totaled $4.25 billion.
At present, seeding of cold fog at temperatures below freezing is an
operational technology. This procedure is used at numerous civilian
and military airports, and shows net benefits of magnitude significant
enough to permit its undertaking by private firms and local govern-
ments. According to the Interdepartmental Committee for Atmos-
pheric Sciences, cold fog dissipation programs at several airports have
shown benefit-cost ratios of more than 5 to 1 savings in delayed or
diverted traffic.8
Unfortunately, cold fogs constitute only about 5 percent of the eco-
nomically disruptive fogs which occur in the United States. The Air-
line Transport Association estimates that elimination of delays due to
warm fogs would result in annual savings of $75 million at 1971 prices.
8 Crutchfield. James A., ''Weather Modification : The Economic Potential." draft of paper
prepared for Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Uni-
versity of Washington, Seattle. Wash.. May 1977.
7 Beckwith. W. B.. 1966* "Impacts of Weather on the Airline Industry : the Value of Fos:
Dispersal Programs," in : Sewell, W. R. D., ed., 1966. "Human Dimensions of Weather
Modification" University of Chicago, Department of Geographv, research paper No. 105,
pp. 195-207. •
s Federal Council for Science and Technologv. "A National Program for Accelerating
Progress in Weather Modification," ICAS Rept. No. 15a, Executive Office of the President,
June 1971.
34-857—79 33
478
In addition, about $300 million in losses are incurred by fog-associated
vehicle accidents on the Nation's highways. Little more needs to be said
to indicate the payoff which could result from further advances in
warm fog dispersal programs. Fortunately, although reliable opera-
tional technology for warm fog dissipation does not yet exist, it ap-
pears that the technical problems are manageable and that successful
procedures are not too far from development.
PRECIPITATION AUGMENTATION
The economic potential of precipitation augmentation through seed-
ing operations is great. In areas of or during periods of marginal pre-
cipitation, increases of only a few percent might mean the difference
between a plentiful crop and complete failure.
Orographic cloud seeding
The Interdepartmental Committee on Atmospheric Sciences has re-
ported that irrigation benefits of $50 per acre-foot per year can be gen-
erated by snowpack augmentation in the Colorado River Basin.9 On
the basis of a 15-percent increase in snowpack due to seeding, it is esti-
mated that about 2 million additional acre-feet of water per year could
be generated at a cost of about $1.50 per acre-foot. Other economic
benefits such as increased hydroelectric power and salinity control
would also result.
By 1977, the scientific community generally supported the thesis
that operational capability for seeding winter orographic clouds to
produce increased precipitation on the order of 10 to 20 percent had
been achieved. Arguments now relate mostly to unknowns regarding
individual seeding performances and the separation of seeding effects
from natural occurrences.
The economic gains from seeding orographic clouds can be signifi-
cant, especially when facilities already exist for storing and distribut-
ing the increased flows which result. Studies in California and Colorado
suggest that benefits from snowpack augmentation exceed costs. Re-
garding the Colorado experience, Weisbecker said.10 "On this basis,
it appears that the benefits of an operational program could exceed the
sum of the direct costs and the indirect costs to the areas of origin in
the upper basin."
Connective cloud seeding
From a national viewpoint, the potential for economic gains through
the ability to increase precipitation from convective cloud systems i.s of
far greater consequence than that from orographic storms. Un for-
tunately, operative capability in this area has not yet been achieved.
A ( cording to Crutchfield : 11
Operational procedures for using these very large potential atmospheric re-
sources still await the development of more complete scientific understanding and
8 Ibid.
10 Weisbecker. Leo W., "Technology Assessment of Winter Orographic Snowpack Aug-
mentation in the Upper Colorado River Basin." summary report, Stanford Research Insti-
tute. Menlo Park, Calif., May 1972. pp. 13-19.
u Crutchfield. James A., "Weather Modification : Tbe Economic Potential." draft of
paper prepared for Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce,
University of Washington, Seattle. Wash.. May 1977.
479
the capacity to model convective systems in ways that will indicate appropriate
points of attack for enhancement or inhibition of precipitation.
The possibility must not be ruled out that subsequent research may suggest
that convective clouds are simply not amenable to controlled modification ; a con-
clusion which would be discouraging but still economically useful in itself. More
hopeful, and more likely, is the prospect of developing enough predictive capabil-
ity to generate rules of thumb about effectiveness of seeding operations. Then,
and only then, will farmers change their techniques to take full economic ad-
vantage of the additional water.
What makes the potential gains from convective system seeding so
attractive is the fact that these storms are widely distributed geo-
graphically and they influence grain producing areas of national and
international significance. Crutchfield notes that if precipitation were
increased in the semiarid high-plains States by 2 or 3 percent, the costs
of operating a precipitation augmentation program would be easily
covered.12
Since limited experience upon which meaningful economic Analyses
of benefits from modification of convective storm systems exists, only
crude estimates are available. Nevertheless, it appears that if opera-
tional programs were in effect in North America, Europe, Australia
and the U.S.S.R., wheat production in these areas might be increased
by as much as 5 percent.13 This is very significant since wheat produc-
tion increases in the range of 3 to 8 percent would meet normal import
requirements of a large part of the nonwheat producing regions of the
world.14 The foregoing projections are based on an increase in pre-
cipitation on the order of 10 percent, but this might be overly optimis-
tic since most atmospheric scientists believe increases of 3 to 5 percent
would be a major breakthrough.
Of considerable interest is the production of additional water during
periods of drought. This would have significant economic payoff. The
problem, however, is that weather modification depends on the avail-
ability of moisture in the atmosphere and is therefore more likely to
increase jDrecipitation during periods that would normally be wet. The
atmospheric conditions associated with prolonged droughts are any-
thing but conducive to outstanding successes for weather modification
programs. A corollary is that the instability of agricultural output due
to weather variations might be increased through weather modification
practices and this should be recognized.
Precipitation augmentation and energy considerations
Additional water supplies developed through precipitation augmen-
tation will have little direct impact on most energy issues although
small increments of hydroelectric power will result. The most signifi-
cant area of energy-water interaction, in which augmented water sup-
plies could play an important role, is related to coal and oil shale
development in the northern Great Plains and Western United States.
In these semiarid regions, the incremental development of water could
be of an order of magnitude significant enough to resolve conflicts
between major water uses — namely energy resource development and
12 Crutchfield. James A., "Weather Modification : The Economic Potential," draft of paper
prepared for Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Uni-
versity of Washington, Seattle, Wash., May 1977.
" Ihid.
« Ibid.
480
irrigated agriculture. Comments on the Missouri Kiver Basin given in
the introduction address this issue.
HAIL SUPPRESSION
The economic importance of hail suppression ranks second only to
precipitation augmentation in terms of significance to agricultural
production. Average annual losses from hail total about $500 million
in the United States. Most of the damage occurs in the Great Plains
and in Midwestern and Southwestern States.
While rapid progress in hail suppression technology has been made
in recent years, a National Hail Research Experiment, funded by NSF
and conducted by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, could
not find conclusive evidence that reduction in hail damage was actually
achieved in target areas.15 On the other hand, the Interdepartmental
Committee for Atmospheric Sciences reported in 1971 that in one area
of the North Caucasus of the Soviet Union, hail suppression had been
operational for more than 5 years.16 It noted that the value of crops
saved exceeded the costs of the program by a factor of 10 or more.
The National Center for Atmospheric Research indicates a break-
even point of about 10 percent effectiveness in the Great Plains. In the
East, a higher percentage reduction of hail would be necessary for
cost-effectiveness since hail damages are less. Crutchfield states that at
a 25-percent reduction level (about the best to be expected), wheat
yields in the United States might be increased by 1 percent 17 but this
might be low since research indicates that hail-suppression techniques
also tend to increase total precipitation.
LIGHTNING SUPPRESSION AND REDUCTION IN STORM DAMAGE
More distant in terms of operational capability (in some cases this
may never be achieved) are procedures for suppressing lightning and
modifying damages from major storms.
Although average annual losses of $100 million from lightning-
caused fires appear to make the economics of lightning suppression
attractive, there is a growing opinion within the U.S. Forest Service
and among professional foresters that naturally occurring forest fires
are not as detrimental to long-term net forest yields as had been previ-
ously thought.18 In any event, the technology of lightning suppres-
sion is not yet at operational readiness and the economic implications
are clouded.
Loss of hundreds of lives and damages totaling billions of dollars
are incurred annually as a result of major storms.19 This makes the
prospect of modifying such systems very attractive. At present, how-
ever, the knowledge of storm processes and mechanics of alteration
15 Crutchfield, James A., "Weather Modification : The Economic Potential," draft of paper
prepared for Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Univer-
sity of Washington, Seattle, Wash.. May 1977;
18 Federal Council for Science and Technology, "A National Program for Accelerating
Progress in Weather Modification," ICAS Kept. No. 15a, Executive Office of the President,
June 1971.
17 Crutchfield, James A., "Weather Modification : The Economic Potential," draft of paper
prepared for Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Univer-
sity of Washington, Seattle. Wash., May 1977.
18 Crutchfield, James A.. "Weather Modification : The Economic Potential." draft of paper
prepared Cor Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Univer-
sity of Washington, Seattle, Wash., May 1977.
19 Ibid.
481
are not adequately understood and, as a result, meaningful assessment
of potential economic benefits is not possible. The concept that the
major portion of current damages might be eliminated if successful
modification of storm characteristics (such as wind velocities) could
be achieved is misleading. Until the side effects of changing large
storm systems such as hurricanes are known, the benefits to be
achieved will elude identification. Modification of wind velocities, for
example, might cause increases in damaging rainfall or shifts in re-
gional distribution of precipitation.
The dangers inherent in tampering with major storm systems, on
the basis of incomplete understanding of such S}rstems, are pointed out
in the following statement by Crutchfield : 20
The first tentative experiments in hurricane seeding — limited to four storms —
only nibbled at the edges of the scientific problems involved, though the results
were certainly interesting enough to suggest an expanded effort. But an attempt
to transfer the program to the Pacific Ocean where larger numbers of storms
more remote from populated areas could be used for experimental purposes
brought such vigorous objections from Japan and China that the program was
halted. One can only contemplate with awe the wrangling that would develop
if demonstrably workable procedures to reduce peak velocities in storms affect-
ing the continental United States were alleged — correctly or incorrectly — to
have influenced the quantity of precipitation received by States in the normal
storm path. There is some evidence (not unchallenged, however) that agricul-
tural, municipal, and industrial activities have benefited substantially from the
increase in water supplies generated by damaging storms.
In summary, modification of Atlantic or Caribbean hurricanes inevitably in-
volves a mixture of benfits and costs so complex as to defy even the grossest kind
of guess as to potential economic gains at this time. Given the inevitable lack
of precision in dentifying causal relationships running from the modification
procedures to perceived winds, waves, and precipitation, public confusion is
pkely to take the form of vigorous defensive action by those who feel them-
selves threatened.
Analytic Methods for Economic Analysis
In 1965, at a symposium on the economic and social aspects of
weather modification held at the National Center for Atmospheric
fosearcli, the question of identifying and measuring the economic
aspects of weather change was considered. An ideal weather pattern
model was proposed by Ackerman.21 His concept was that the model
could be used to determine what weather elements mean to the sys-
tem of economic production and consumption in any given geograph-
ical area and to determine an ideal weather pattern within a given
system.
Although the quantification of such a model will require consider-
able research, the idea of being able to trace the impact of a given
weather shift throughout the economic system has merit.
A number of standard analytic tools are available for use in eco-
nomic analyses of weather changes. They include : input-output mod-
els, benefit-cost analysis, simulation, regression analysis, and linear
programing. All of these approaches have potential, but they all share
the problem of lack of basic data and understanding for quantification
of coefficients and parameters fundamental to their successful use. The
20 Ibid.
21 Ackerman. E. A.. 1966. "Economic Analysis of Weather : An Ideal Weather Pattern
Model." in Sewell, W.R.D., ed., 1966. "Human Dimensions of Weather Modification," Uni-
versity of Chicago, Department of Geography, research paper No. 105, pp. 61-75.
482
design of an input-output model has been described by Langford,22
and Gutmanis and Goldner 23 give a good discussion of problems as-
sociated with the application of benefit-cost analysis to weather modi-
fication issues.
It would appear that economists concerned with weather modifica-
tion programs are inclined to support the use of benefit-cost analysis
as a promising technique for determining comparative social costs and
benefits of such programs. A difficulty relates to the extensive geo-
graphic scope of weather modification programs compared to those
ordinarily assessed by benefit-cost analyses. In addition, there is little
data upon which to evaluate the economic consequences of large-scale
weather modification activities. For limited-scope weather modifi-
cation projects such as fog dispersal at airports and cloud seeding to
artificially induce rain in a small region, Maunder suggests that many
of the problems associated with benefit-cost analysis could be over-
come and the procedure readily adopted.24 Based on an evaluation of
a study by Gutmanis and Goldner, Maunder summarized the principle
limitations on use of benefit-cost analysis for expansive weather mod-
ification programs as follows :
(1) The extensive geographic and functional scope of such
programs ;
(2) The difficulties in obtaining the necessary qualitative and
quantitative data;
(3) The difficulty resulting from the availability of several
possible technological approaches which may be employed in
varying degrees either singly or in combination ; and
(4) The difficulty in integrating and supporting benefit-cost
analysis with welfare economic theory.
Case Studies of the Economics of Weather Modification
hungry horse area, montana
Cloud seeding above the Hungry Horse area was conducted in 1951,
and again during the winters of 1954 through 1958, but these early ef-
forts did not provide an adequate data base for an economic assess-
ment. Then, in 1967, based on the results of a 1966-67 winter seeding
program, North American Weather Consultants estimated that run-
off in the region would be increased by 5 percent.25 On tliis basis, it
was determined that an increase in energy production at all down-
stream power installations would total about 200,000,000 kWh per year,
with added power benefits of about $500,000 per year. Initial seeding
costs were estimated to be $300,000, with continuing costs of $75,000
to $100,000 per year.
-- Langford, T. W., 1968, "A Proposed Model for the Evaluation of Economic Aspects of
Weather Modification Programs for a System of Regions." in Sewell, W.K.D., et al., 1968,
"Human Dimensions of the Atmosphere." National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.,
pp. 113-120.
M Gutmanis, I. and Goldner. L., 1966. "Evaluation of Benefit-Cost Analysis as Applied
to Weather and Climate Modification. ' In Sewell, W.K.I)., ed., 1 *»<;♦;. "Human Dimensions
of Weather Modification." University of Chicago, Department of Geography, research paper
No. 105, pp. 111-12.-).
;-" Maunder, W. J.f "The Value of the Weather," Methuen & Co., Ltd., London, England,
1970.
* North American Weather Consultants. "Performance of an Atmospheric Water Re-
sources Research Program in the Hungrv Horse Area. Montana," 1966—67, report No. 15-9,
North American Weather Consultants, Goleta, Calif., 1!m;7.
483
CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN
In a 1969 study, the Travelers Research Corp. estimated that run-
off from the entire Connecticut River basin might be increased by
about 2 million acre-feet (15 percent) per year through a weather
modification program.26 It was calculated that this increment of water
would cost $2.30 per acre-foot, or $4,600,000 annually. The report also
stated that net benefits of $1,400,000 from municipal water supply,
and $2,600,000 from supply of cooling water for thermal electric gen-
erating stations and increased flow for hydroelectric power generation
might be realized by the 1980's. Other benefits which were not evalu-
ated include pollution abatement, agriculture, groundwater recharge,
flood control, and recreation. These are not all mutually compatible,
however. Travelers estimated that an average water supply increase
of only about 3 percent would permit the weather modification program
to pay for itself in approximately 15 years.
The Travelers study was based on the assumption that precipitation
from storms occurring during all seasons of the year would be in-
creased by 15 percent. Their benefit-cost analysis was based on average
conditions and did not account for variances in benefit-cost relation-
ships which would occur during wet or dry years.
STATE OF ILLINOIS
In a 1972 study of the impact of weather modification practices
on corn and soybean yields in Illinois, Huff and Changnon concluded
that in most regions of that State corn and soybean crops could be
benefited economically through a cloud-seeding program, provided
that precipitation increases of at least 10 percent were achieved.27 It
was also stated that rainfall outputs from seeding operations would
have to be accurately defined or "more damage than benefit could
result."
The study showed that a good deal of variability could be expected
from year to year and that differential effects could be expected
in a significant percentage of years, that is, one crop might be helped
and another harmed.
These studies were based on the use of several seeding models for a
sampling period of 38 years and thus represent anticipated results
rather than findings based on observation.
NINE-COUNTY SOUTHEASTERN CROP REPORTING DISTRICT, SOUTH DAKOTA
A 1973 study by a special team at the Agricultural Experiment
Station of South Dakota State University28 showed that increased
precipitation could have considerable direct and indirect effects on
the economy of a region by increasing crop yields. As yields increased,
total revenue rose rapidly, with costs remaining about the same. A
2« Travelers Research Corporation, "Water From the Skv," Hartford. Conn.. 1069.
v Huff, F. A. and Changnon. S. A., Jr., "Evaluation of Potential Effects of Weather Modi-
fication on Agriculture in Illinois," Journal of Applied Meteorology, pp. 377 to 3S4. Vol.
11. No. 2. March 1972.
as Agricultural experiment station special study team, "Effects of Additional Precipita-
tion on Agricultural Production, the Environment, the Economy and Human Society in
bouth Dakota," South Dakota State TJnivprsitv, Brookings, S. Dak., June 1973, pp. 113-12S.
484
conservative multiplier of 3.6 was used to estimate the indirect impact.
For the nine-county Southeastern crop reporting district, historical
vields produced an annual total revenue of $211,200,000, total costs
of $145,700,000 and total profits of $65,450,000. These base data were
compared with the results of nine additional combinations of yields
and prices. Yields used were minimum, average and maximum ex-
pected increases and prices ranged from the historical average to 5-,
10- or 15-cent-per-bushel decreases for all marketable grains.
For the alternatives considered, total revenues ranged from
$2 13,100,000 to $234,200,000 and total costs were found to vary slightly
from the historic base value, with the highest total cost up only
$800,000. Total profits ranged up to $87,700,000 for the run using max-
imum expected yield increase and historical average prices. In this
case, profits increased 34 percent over the base. The lowest profit in-
crease, 3.1 percent, occurred for the combination of the lowest expected
yield increase and a 5-cent-per-bushel decrease in the price of market-
able grain (10- and 15-cent decreases per bushel in grain prices were
not run with the lowest expected yield increase) .
Indirect benefits were computed using a multiplier of 3.6 and were
found to be positively related to direct effects. This means that for each
SI added directly to the economy of the area, a $3.60 final effect on the
area's economy results. A manufacturing segment was not included in
the analysis and the study team noted that actual indirect benefits
might be somewhat higher as a result of this exclusion.
The direct costs of weather modification were found to be approxi-
mately 3.2 cents per acre and it was concluded that the direct costs
associated with additional precipitation would be much less than the
benefits which could be expected.
COLORADO RIVER
The most extensive economic analyses of weather modification prac-
tices have been of winter orographic snowpack augmentation
( WOSA) in the Colorado River Basin. Experimental results of cloud-
seeding operations in southwestern Colorado suggest that runoff in
the basin can be increased by about 20 to 25 percent.29' 30 This would
result in an average annual increase of about 2.3 million acre-feet
( maf ) . An operational program to yield this flow would incur a direct
cost of about $5.4 million per year.31
In an intensive study of snow enhancement in Colorado by the Stan-
ford Research Institute, Weisbecker specified two categories of eco-
nomic impacts. These are :
(1) Effects on the cloud-seeding target areas and those downwind
areas that might inadvertently be subjected to additional precipita-
tion; and (2) possible uses of the augmented water supply, whether in
the upper or lower basins, or outside the Colorado River Basin.
a Hurley, Patrick A., "Augmenting Colorado River by Weather Modification." Journal of
the Irrigation and Drainage Division, ASCE, vol. 94, No. IR4, Proc. Paper 6271, December
1968. pp. 303-380.
"WRudell. R. K.. Stockwell. H. T., and Walsh. R. G., "Weather Modification: An Economic
Alternative for Augmenting Water Supplies," Water Resources Bulletin, vol. 9, No. 1, Feb-
v 1977. pp. 11;5-128.
Weisbecker, Leo W.. "Technology Assessment of Winter Orographic Snowpack Augmen-
tation in the Upper Colorado River Basin," summary report, Stanford Research Institute,
Menlo Park, Calif., May 1972, pp. 13-19.
485
Regarding economic impacts in target areas, the Stanford study
stated:
The known effects on the target areas are almost uniformly adverse, with the
exception of the possible advantages that extra snowfall, particularly at the
beginning of the season, might bring to operators of ski resorts and their patrons.
Although the impact on the upland grazing industry appears to be negligible,
increased costs of mining operations and timber cutting (and possible suspension
of activities) ; interference with road, rail, and air transport; and shortening
of the tourist season would all have repercussions of an unfavorable sort on the
economies of a number of small towns, particularly in western Colorado.
Weisbecker commented that measurement of the extent of these
effects was not possible on the basis of published information and that
extensive field work would be required to adequately assess local eco-
nomic injury. A rough annual estimate of these costs was given as $2
million in the basin and $1 million out of the basin, which is about
equivalent to $1 per acre-foot of water produced. Adding these costs to
direct costs of cloud seeding and costs of avalanche control, flood fore-
casting, and environmental monitoring programs, produced an esti-
mate of the cost of water produced of less than $3 per acre-foot. Weis-
becker noted, "This is still a very inexpensive way of providing extra
water in the Colorado River Basin."
It was also found that, although there might be significant costs on a
local or regional basis, the small-scale of the economies and the few
people affected adversely would assure that the national economic
effects would be negligible.
The report concluded that :
If only existing facilities are used to store and distribute water and generate
power, benefits of at least $7.8 million annually could be generated in-basin and
S5 million annually by out-of-basin spillover runoff. Of the $12.8 million total
annual benefits, $6.2 million is accounted for by electric power generation. This
use of WOSA provides the least equivocal form of benefits for an operational
program. On this basis, it appears that the benefits of an operational program
could exceed the sum of the direct costs and indirect costs to the areas of origin
in the upper basin.
It was also noted that, "WOSA is an inexpensive method of aug-
menting the water supply in the Colorado River Basin." Annual oper-
ating costs for the WOSA system were estimated at about $5.4 mil-
lion, giving an average cost of $2.37 per acre-foot for in-basin runoff
alone and $1.58 per acre-foot overall.
In another study of the economic aspects of WOSA. Rudell et al.
found that "weather modification is an economically feasible means
to provide additional water for the Colorado River Basin." 32 The
principal findings of their study are given below :
1. The benefit-cost ratio varies with place of water use. It was esti-
mated to be 13.1 to 1 for Arizona, 16.3 to 1 for New Mexico, and 21.3
to 1 for California.
2. Compared with other recognized means of augmenting water
supplies, weather modification appears to be one of the least-cost alter-
natives. Direct costs of $0.91 to $1.15 per acre-foot of water produced
were reported. Indirect costs of additional snow removal and loss of
personal income due to mine closings were estimated to add $0.15 to
32 Rudell. R. K.. Stockwell. H. T., and Walsh. R. G.. "Weather Modification : An Economic
Alternative for Augmenting Water Supplies," Water Resources Bulletin, vol. 9, No. 1, Feb-
ruary 1977, pp. 115-128.
486
$0.19 per acre-foot. Extra market costs due to traffic delays caused
by additional snow were calculated to increase costs by about $0.15.
3. Only about 12.4 percent of weather modification costs is for capi-
tal construction, making the program easily reversible with little loss
of sunk costs.
4. Variable costs of operation are about $975 per day. Thus small
increases in daily precipitation would cover the direct costs of
operation.
5. Water by weather modification is worth $2 per acre-foot for
power production and $14.50 to $26.50 per acre-foot for irrigation of
forage crops. If the additional water is used for higher valued crop
production, or for domestic and/or industrial purposes, its value is
even greater.
6. Extra market values associated with weather modification could
include travel delays, grazing and timber rescheduling, and changes
in plant and animal communities. While such factors have little effect
on the total costs of weather modification, they may be very important
to those directly affected and could influence decisions to initiate
weather modification projects.
Conclusions
The state of the art of operational weather modification programs
is such that meaningful economic evaluation of such activities is lim-
ited to special, localized cases. As stated by Crutchfield.33 there is a
need for substantially greater knowledge of: "(1) the processes that
we seek to alter; (2) the methods through which that alteration can
be achieved ; and (3) the extent to which the resulting effects can be
anticipated in time, space and degree."
Nevertheless, the economic potentialities are very attractive. Oper-
ating costs of cloud seeding are very small, ranging from 5 to 20 cents
per acre of target area, and the needed capital equipment is relatively
inexpensive. The few economic studies which are available suggest
possible benefit-cost ratios ranging upward to 20 to l.34
33 Crutchfield. James A., "Weather Modification : The Economic Potential." draft of pap?r
prepared for Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Univer-
sity of Washington, Seattle. Wash., May 1977.
^Fleagle, R. G., Crutchfield, J. A., Johnson, R. W., and Abdo, M. F., "Weather Modifica-
tion in the Public Interest," University of Washington Press, Seattle, Wash., 1973, pp.
31-40.
CHAPTER 13
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION
(By William C. Jolly. Analyst, Environment and Natural Resources Policy
Division, Congressional Research Service)
Introduction
modification of weather and climate
"Weather and climate are major factors in human activity. Even
when human communities have adapted themselves reasonably well
to the climate of a region, temporary deviations from the normal —
severe storms, droughts, unseasonable frosts — periodically cause acute
monetary loss and personal suffering. Weather modification is thus
an age-old dream. Research on atmospheric processes has apparently
brought man to the threshold of realizing that dream, at least in
part." 1
Written nearly a decade ago, those words still succinctly capture
the "why" and the status of planned weather modification efforts. It
is axiomatic that weather modification actions which impact human
communities also impact natural communities in the ecosystems of
which both are but components. This chapter seeks to briefly address
the ecological implications of planned and inadvertent weather modi-
fication in target and nontarget areas, and to review with respect to
those implications the level of understanding which several investi-
gations in the last decade have sought to advance.
It is the function of this chapter to summarize the current state
of knowledge about ecological effects of weather modification and to
do so for a general, not a specialist, audience. Accordingly, the chap-
ter represents the author's distillation of salient findings of others
rather than any original contribution of either ideas or research.
ECOLOGY AND ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
At the risk of merely restating what by now may have become com-
monly known, if not obvious, it can be said that ecology is generally
defined as the study of the relationship between living organisms and
their environments (including both living and nonliving components
thereof). That is, ecology deals both with organisms in their environ-
ment and with the processes of movement of energy and matter which
link organisms and place. Ecological systems — the subject matter of
ecology and the structure and function of which the ecologist seeks
1 Charles F. Cooper and William C. Jolly. Ecological effects of weather modification : a
problem analysis, Ann Arbor : University of Michigan, School of Natural Resources, 1969,
p. 1.
(487)
488
to study and understand — are definable complexes of related biotic
assemblages of animals, plants, and microbes together with their par-
ticular abiotic, chemico-physical environments. As Kormondy lias
noted:
Ecosystems are real — like a pond, or a field, a forest, an ocean, or even an
aquarium ; they are also an abstract in the sense of being conceptual schemes
developed from a knowledge of real systems. In spite of the great diversity in
types of actual ecosystems — from small to large, terrestrial to fresh water to
marine, field to laboratory — and in spite of the unique combinations of par-
ticular abiotic and biotic components in any particular one, they have in com-
mon certain general structural and functional attributes that are recognizable,
analyzable, and predictable.2
In seeking to understand what changes in plant and animal com-
munities may result from any given modification in weather which
man might effect deliberately, it is to the young evolving science of
ecology and to ecologists that decisionmakers turn for best judgments
in interpreting the relationships which may be affected and, in some
cases, actually predicting the nature and magnitude of ecological
effects which can be expected.
It must be borne in mind that ecological systems require a knowledge
of both past and present in order to predict the future. Also, ecology
is not independent of time and place, so broad generalizations are not
easily nor accurately made. Thus, while descriptive ecology is well-
developed, truly predictive ecology is but in its infancy.
KNOWLEDGE OF ECOLOGICAL OIPLICATIONS OF APPLIED WEATHER MODI-
FICATION TECHNOLOGIES
If 1946 can be taken as the benchmark year for "modern" weather
modification technology (when GE scientists Langmuir and Schaefer
successfully modified clouds by "seeding" them with pellets of dry ice) ,
1966 can be said to mark the explicit recognition that environmental
effects of applied weather modification technology could be of serious
importance and were yet but largely a matter of speculation. In that
year, the ad hoc weather working group of the ecological study commit-
tee of the Ecological Society of America published its report on bio-
logical aspects of weather modification which it had submitted to the
National Science Foundation's Special Commission for Weather Modi-
fication.3 The report of the NSF Special Commission, also published
in 19G6, noted that "from the present crude state of the field, one can
roughly predict that the biological outcomes of weather modification
are apt to be a mixed bag of economically good and bad effects in man's
artificial ecosystems. It is difficult to visualize any desirable effect on
the small preserves of natural communities.4 The Commission advised:
It is the position of the Commission that there should be a strong effort to bring
the field of biological forecasting up to a higher level of usefulness. This is inan-
2 Edward J. Kormondy, Concepts of Ecology, 2d ed., Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-
Hall. 1976. pp. 1-2.
3 D. A. Livingstone, biological aspects of weather modification, a report from the Ecolo-
gical Society of America's ad hoc w eather working ^roup of the ecological study committee
to the Special Commission for Weather -Modification of the National Science Foundation
Bull. Ecol. Soc. Amer. 47 (196G) : 39-78.
4 National Science Foundation, weather and climate modification, report of the Special
Commission on Weather Modification, Washington, D.C., National Science Foundation. 19G6,
p. 19.
489
datory in planning weather and climate modification over areas involving more
than a few hundred square miles.5
This and other related recommendations of the NSF Special Com-
mission directly or indirectly led to a number of ecological studies
which have been specifically concerned with identifying and predicting
ecological effects of weather modification.
One of the first sponsored studies was the problem analysis conducted
by Cooper and Jolly 6 for the Bureau of Reclamation, as that agency
began to better balance operational weather modification research with
studies aimed at understanding ecological, legal, economic, and other
social effects of weather modification activity. The report included
"sections on anticipated kinds of weather modification ; effects in semi-
arid climates and in humid climates ; pests and diseases ; direct effects
of seeding agents; biology of lakes and streams: fog, hail, lightning,
and hurricane modification ; environmental monitoring programs ; in-
ferences from ecological theory; recommended research; and recom-
mended premodification field surveys." 7
An extensive bibliography of relevant literature was also included.
Cooper, whose 1967 paper on the effects of weather modification on
plant and animal communities represented one of the earliest attempts
to anticipate ecological ramifications of the seriously developing
weather modification technology,8 has continued to publish on the
subject.9
Other major studies of note include work on the impacts of snow en-
hancement supported by the National Science Foundation,10 and the
Bureau of Reclamation,11 and on impacts and issues associated with
efforts to suppress hail.12 Also of importance and interest, of course,
are the proceedings of the several conferences on weather modification
which have been sponsored biennially since 1968 by the American
Meteorological Society. Papers on environmental considerations and
impacts associated with weather modification efforts and technologies
5 Ibid., p. 20.
6 Cooper anrl Jolly, ecological effects of weather modification, 160 pp. (Note 1.)
7 Ibid., p. 160.
s C[harlesl F. Cooper, effects of weather modification on plant and animal communities.
Taper presented at Symposium on Weather Modification, AAAS Committee on Arid Lands,
New York. Dec. HO. 1067 (mimeo).
6 Charles F. Cooper, ecological impacts of local and global weather modification, paper
prepared for Hist annual meeting, American Meteorological Society, San Francisco, Jan. 14,
1971. 16 pp. (mimeo).
Charles F. Cooper, ecological implications of weather modification, paper prepared for
the Weather Modification Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1977, 19 pp.
(mimeo).
Charles F. Cooper, what might man-induced climate change mean? Foreign Afrairs 56(3)
(1978) : 500-520.
Charles F. Cooper, Georsre W. Cox. and Warren A. Johnson, investisations recommended
for assessing the environmental impact of snow augmentation in the Sierra Nevada. Calif.,
prepared for tbe Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Water Resources,
San Diego : San Diego State University. Center for Regional Environmental Studies, 1974,
84 pp.
10 Leo W. Weisbecker fcorap.). The impacts of snow enhancement, contract report pre-
pared for the National Science Foundation, Norman : University of Oklahoma Press, 1974,
624 pn.
13 Harold W. Steinhoff and Jack D. Ives (eds.). Ecological impacts of snowpaek augmen-
tation in the San Juan Mountains. Colorado. Final report of the San Juan ecological project
to the Bureau of Reclamation. 25 papers. 1976. 489 pp.
22 Stanley A. Changnon, et al.. Hail suppression, impacts and issues. Final report, tech-
nology assessment of the suppression of hail. Office of Exploratorv Research and Problem
Assessment. RANK program, National Science Foundation. Urbana, 111. : State Water Sur-
rey, 1977, 432 pp.
490
have been included in the proceedings of these conferences.13 The final
Environmental Statement for Project Sky water, published in 1977 by
the Bureau of Eeclamation, consists of a three- volume statement cover-
ing the post- 1964 research program of the Bureau relating to the ef-
fects that cloud seeding for increasing growing season precipitation
and mountain snowpacks might have if the technology were applied
over long periods of time.14 One of the appendix reports attached to the
statement reviews research relating to environmental effects of seeding
agents, particularly silver iodide. The question of the effects of silver
iodide on the environment, particularly over time, has also been ad-
dressed and reported on in other publications.15 The definitive review
to date of the subject of environmental effects of nucleating agents,
based on a 1976 workshop, has recently been prepared by Klein ia
under National Science Foundation sponsorship.
Thus in the 12 years since the National Science Foundation's Spe-
cial Commission on Weather Modification issued its report, a sig-
nificant volume of research aimed at determining and evaluating
possible ecological effects of weather modification has been under-
taken. In summarizing the results and inferences from Project Sky-
water which relate to environmental impacts, Howell tabulates 11
individual contracts for environmental research sponsored by Project
Sky water.17 They cover the 1964-76 period and total nearly $3
million.
Some of the more specific findings and conclusions of the research
efforts cited above are extracted and summarized under the various
topical headings which follow.
Important Variables
As Cooper has noted, "Weather modification is by definition a
change in the natural climatic environment.*' 18 He continues : "It is
impossible to predict 'the ecological effects of weather modification.*
A specific expected alteration in the natural weather pattern must first
be defined. Usually this can be done only within probability limits.
Unless the expected change in climatic input to the ecosystem is known,
no reasonable predictions can be made. Seldom has sufficient infornia-
13 See : Proe., First National Conference on Weather Modification of the American Mete-
orological Society, April 28-May 1, 1968, State University of New York at Albany : 173-
ISO. Boston : Amor. Meteor. Soc. ;
Proc, Second National Conference on Weather Modification of the American Meteorolog-
ical Society, April 6-9, 1970, Santa Barbara, Calif. : 411-414. Boston : Amer. Meteor. Soc. ;
Proc, Third Conference on Weather Modification of the American Meteorological Society,
June 26-20, 1972. Rapid City, S. Dak. : 226-231. Boston : Amer. Meteor. Soc. ;
Proc, Fourth Conference on Weather Modification of American Meteorological Society,
Nov. 18-21, 1974. Fort Lauderdale, Fla. : 502-334. Boston : Amer. Meteor. Soc.
14 Bureau of Reclamation, Final environmental statement for Project Skywater. Denver:
Bureau of Reclamation Engineering and Research Division, 1977, 340 pp. (vol. 1) plus
appendices (vols, 2, 3).
15 Charles F. Cooper and William C Jolly. Ecological effects of silver Iodide and other
weather modification agents: a review. Water Resources Research 6 (1) (1970) : 88-98i
D. A. Klein. Ecological impacts of nucleating agents used in weather modification prosrrams :
an interdisciplinary assessment, J. Weather Mod. 9(4) (1977) : 51-56; Ivan C Smith and
Ronnie L. Carson. Trace Metals In the Environment: Vol. 2. Silver, Ann Arbor, Mich. : Ann
Arbor Science Publishers. 1977, 490 pp.
19 D. A. Klein fed.), Environmental impacts of nucleating agents used In weather modi-
fication. StrOudsberg, Pa. : Dowden, Hutchison and Ross. 1978.
"Wallace E. Howell, Environmental Impacts of precipitation management: results and.
Inferences from Project Skywater. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 58(6) (1977) : 489.
18 Cooper, Ecological implications of weather modification, p. 1 (Note 9).
491
tion about expected weather changes been made available to those who
would make ecological assessments." 19 It may be useful to mention
a number of the variables which must be considered before one can
attempt to predict the ecological impact of a given weather modifica-
tion. These variables are treated more completely by, inter alia, Cooper
and Jolly,20 and by Cooper.21
TEMPORAL CONSIDERATIONS
Season of modification effort
Within a given ecosystem reactions of vegetation and associated
animal communities to an expected 5-percent to 10-percent increase
in mean precipitation during years of normal or subnormal precipita-
tion will vary, for example, depending on whether that increase falls
during a dormant or a growing season, or whether the increase comes
in the form of rain or snow. Whether there are impacts such as im-
pedance to physical movement (as with deep snow and deer), or
threats to nesting and newborn survival (as with heavy, cold rains
which can affect incubating ducks or newly hatched pheasant chicks),
may also be of importance. Similarly, if a plant community were sub-
ject to moisture stress and precipitation enhancement measures pro-
duced timely relief, the impact would be different than if the plants
had reached a point of no return in their response to moisture depriva-
tion. Thus, the season at which a given effect is achieved may be of
prime importance.
Duration of effort : Short-term versus long-term
Biological communities evolve and exist under terms of natural
variability in weather and climate. The kinds of reactions of such
communities to weather modifications of limited duration will be quite
different from those when a given modification recurs with some regu-
larity over time. Pest or disease outbreaks may be triggered by a par-
ticular change of critical timing in a moisture regime, for example,
but changes in species composition in ecosystems will normally require
at the very least more than one season of change in precipitation
pattern, and often several seasons are necessary.
Regularity of modification effort
Just as the duration of effected changes in weather pattern, both in
terms of days or weeks in a given season and of weeks, months, or sea-
sons of a given year, is significant, so is the regularity with which a
given change is produced. Biological communities will react one way if
a 10-percent increase in mean precipitation is realized on an annual
basis but the timing and distribution of that increase is rather variable
over the year and from year to year. The response may well be dif-
ferent if the increase occurs with some fidelity at a given season (or
seasons), from one year to the next — especially if the time of such
change is coincident with a particularly critical time in the life cycle
of an organism or a community.
19 Ibid., p. 3.
» Cooper and Jolly, Ecological effects of weather modification (Note 6).
n Cooper, Ecological implications of weather modification (Note 9).
492
ECOSYSTEM TYPE
The kinds of response to any given change in weather as a result of a
modification program will also differ depending on the class of ecosys-
tem being affected. A few dichotomies will illustrate the point.
Aquatic versus terrestrial systems
Organisms in aquatic systems are affected by such variables as tur-
bidity, temperature, stream velocities, periods and durations of low
flows, and the chemical quality of the water, including relative levels
of dissolved oxygen. Terrestrial organisms are affected by the timing,
amount, and continued availability of both soil and surface moisture,
and by the form (water, snow, ice) which such moisture may take.
The same level of enhanced (or reduced) precipitation in a given area,
therefore, will have different significance and meaning for terrestrial
than it will for aquatic components. It is necessary to distinguish be-
tween systems being affected at this gross level as well as at finer levels
of detail, too.
Cultivated versus natural systems
Howell has observed that :
Over most of the civilized world, the natural environment is profoundly accul-
turated and bears few traits of wilderness. In considering the natural environ-
ment, one must, therefore, regard the environment as it is exemplified by the real
landscape. Except for a few pockets of wilderness, the environment is the prod-
uct of an ongoing symbiosis between the land and humankind [attributed by
Howell to Dubos]. It is, nevertheless, useful to make the distinction between the
direct, intentional impact of precipitation management on a cultural element
such as agriculture and the complex of indirect effects that may impinge on other
elements of the landscape and biosphere, be these "natural" or cultivated*
Cooper, in treating these two classes of ecosystems, says :
As a rule of thumb, the more intensively managed a tract of landscape, and the
farther it is from its natural ecological condition, the less its species structure is
dependent upon the detail of the local environment and the less sensitive it will
be to minor climatic alteration.23
Because species composition, population structure, growth rate, and
behavior of plants and animals in noncultivated ecosystems are sig-
nificantly different from those attributes of cultivated systems, the
effects of any given modification of weather are likely to be signifi-
cantly different as well.
Arid versus liumid systems
As one would expect, a given relative change in mean precipitation
in more arid systems would be more likely to result, over time, in not
only changes in relative species composition, but possibly changes in
vegetative forms (e.g., shrub to grass) than would changes in humid
ecosystems. The signal to noise ratio is likely to be stronger in the more
arid situation and the response would be ecologically less subtle.
CUMULATIVE AXD SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS
Finally, the obvious must be stated, as Cooper and Jolly did earlier : 24
Ecological effects of weather modification will be the result of moderate shifts in
rates of reproduction, growth, and mortality of weather-sensitive species of plants
- Howell. Environmental Impacts of precipitation management: results and inferences
from Project Sky water, p. 493 (Note 17).
::t Cooper. Ecological implications of weather modification, pp. 6-7 (Note 9).
24 Cooper and Jolly, Ecological effects of weather modification : a problem analysis, p. 2
(Note 1).
493
; and animals. Ecological changes from the kinds of weather modification now
visualized will seldom be sudden or catastrophic. Plant and animal communi-
ties change rather slowly in response to changed climate. The cumulative effect
of slow year-to-year changes in species abundance could be a rather extensive
[ alteration of original condition, but the alteration could take place almost un-
noticed by the general public.
The combined effect of such stresses as air pollution, pesticide application, and
other environmental changes may interact with weather modification in such a
way that the total effect will be substantially greater than the sum of the individ-
ual, perhaps relatively small, alterations.
Effects of Silver Iodide
Nearly all current weather modification efforts depend on the use of
seeding agents to alter the microphysical processes within clouds.
While silver iodide has been the principal nucleating agent to date, it is
not the only such agent. It could be replaced in the future because of the
relatively high cost of silver and demands that widespread application
of silver iodide might place on the silver market. The advantages of
silver iodide with respect to substitutes are its capability of inducing
ice crystal formation at relatively high temperatures, the ease with
which it can be finely divided and carried in updrafts to cloud bases,
and the relatively small amounts required to initiate nucleation. Ten
to 1,000 times the weight of other substances is required to produce the
same quantities of ice crystals.25 Other seeding agents which have been
used or whose potential use has been investigated include dry ice, lead
iodide, common salt, liquid propane, water spray, and a number of
organic compounds. Some of these seeding agents are substitutes for
• silver iodide, while others are intended for increasing precipitation
from warm cloud systems or dispersal of warm fogs through the co-
alescence process, where silver iodide would not be effective. Since the
use of silver iodide in weather modification experiments and opera-
tions has been so widespread, the following discussion is limited to the
potential for environmental impacts from that compound.
Cooper and Jolly reported that available evidence shows little likeli-
hood of environmental effects from the iodine in silver iodide. They
cited a calculation made in an early report that :
A human consumer would have to drink 130 gallons of precipitation from a
storm seeded with silver iodide to obtain as much iodide as in eggs flavored with
iodized table salt and concluded that iodide is ubiquitous in organic and inor-
ganic environments. ... It seems reasonable, therefore, to dismiss iodine in
silver iodide at present levels of use as a source of ecological concern.26
u Particular concern is. therefore, for the effects of concentrations of
silver in the soil and aquatic systems, and it should be recognized that
weather modification is only one avenue by which silver compounds
can enter these systems.
Silver is a paradoxical substance: it is potent as a microbial poison,
but relatively harmless to higher animals and to man. It forms many
different chemical compounds which differ in their biological activity,
23 Bonnie L. Carson and Ivan C. Smith. Silver : an appraisal of environmental exposure.
Technical Report No. 3, for National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Contmet
I No. N01-ES-2-2090. Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City. Mo.. July 16, 1975. p. 221.
, 23 Cooper and Jollv. Ecological effects of weather modification, p. 64 (Note 1).
Cooper and Jolly, Ecological effects of weather modification agents : a review, p. 89 (Note
15).
34-857—79 34
494
complicating the problem of interpreting data from the literature.
Silver is unique among metals in combining very low solubility of
most of its compounds with high toxicity of the soluble fraction, with
the result that it is substantially more harmful to microorganisms than
it is to higher animals and plants.27 Silver, even in its highly soluble
form, is only moderately harmful to mammals, but is much more toxic
to fish than to terrestrial vertebrates, and silver levels required to
damage higher plants are many times greater than those which would
occur in precipitation from seeded storms. Because most land plants do
not actively take up silver, the likelihood of concentrating the metal
through terrestrial food chains is small, both immediately and over a
period of perhaps 20 years.28 It was pointed out, however, that con-
tinuous reassessment during such a period of application should be
made with the accumulation of new information.29
In 1974, Klein and Molise summarized results of their study of two
Colorado weather modification projects :
In summary, the silver levels found in soil, litter, and vegetation samples in two
Colorado weather modification projects appear to be at least one to two orders of
magnitude below where possible interactions between accumulated silver iodide
and changes in decomposer functions have been observed in our studies to date.
The trend toward silver concentration in the vicinity of plant roots suggests that
localized higher concentrations may occur which could be of distinct ecological
interest.30
Recently, based on studies supported by Project Skywater, Howell
estimated the relative quantities of total silver in various environ-
mental compartments for the contiguous United States.
The soil compartment (including also mud and vegetable litter), calculated for
the top 20cm comprising the root zone, contains by far the largest quantity of
silver. . . . Living matter of all sorts from microbes and fungi to animals, which
has on the average a slight tendency to concentrate silver from the soil, contains
the next largest quantity. The exchange between living matter and soil through
uptake and decomposition dominates all other exchanges by at least an order of
magnitude. . . . The silver concentration and content in lakes and rivers are
determined mainly by depositional and erosional exchanges with the soil and by
runoff to the sea. . . . The atmospheric domain receives silver in the form of wind-
blown dust, some of which returns to the soil . . . and some of which is swept up
by particles of precipitation. . . . The silver content of the atmospheric compart-
ment at any moment is small in comparison with the annual transport through it.31
Table 1 shows the annual total losses of silver to the environment
from various sources, as compiled by Carson and Smith.32 It should be
noted, in comparison with other sources of silver, that cloud seeding
contributes about 0.1 million troy ounces of silver annuallv, about 1
percent of the silver received by the atmosphere and one-tenth of 1 per-
cent of that entering the total environment.
Cooper and Tolly. "Ecological Effects of Weather Modification.'" pp. R4-65 (note 11.
Cooner nnd Jolly. "Ecological Effects of Silver Iodide and Other Weather Modification
Agents" : a review, p. SO (note 15).
-s Cooper and Jolly, "Ecological Effects of Weather Modification," pp. GG-70 (note 1).
20 Ibid., p. 70.
WD. A. Klein and E. M. Molise. Ecological ramifications of silver iodide nucleating acrent
accumulation in soil and aquatic environments. Proc, Eonrth conference on weather rnoiii-
of the American Meteorological Society, Nov. 18-21, 1974, Fort Lauderdale, Fla.,
P. 534-.
•'Howell. "Environmental Impacts of Precipitation Management": results and infer-
ence f;-oni Project Skywater. pp. 400 407 (note 17).
C irsoil and Smith, "An Appraisal of Environmental Exposure," pp. 403-406 (note 25).
495
TABLE 1.— ANNUAL LOSSES OF SILVER TO THE ENVIRONMENT FROM VARIOUS SOURCES
[From Carson and Smith, 1975]
[In millions of troy ounces]
Loss category
Air
Water plus
Water land
Land
Total
Mining and milling, total
Cyanidation
Michigan Cu ore tailings
Other Cu ore tailings
Mo. Pb ore tailings
Mine drainage
Leaching of tailings
Blowing of tailings
Primary smelting and refining, total
Of copper
Of lead
Of zinc...
Of silver
Secondary smelting and refining, total
Of precious metal scrap.
Of copper scrap
Of lead scrap.
Fabrication, total..
Of sterling silver
Of medicinals and dental materials..
Of electroplate..
Of other coatings
Of silver compounds
Of photographic products
Brazing
Use and disposal, total...
Photography.
Brazing alloys.
Cloud seeding
Other uses
Urban refuse
Inadvertent sources, total
Iron production:
Sintering
Blast furnaces (5 percent scrap).
Steelmaking:
Open hearth furnaces (44 per-
cent scrap)
Basic oxygen furnaces (29 per-
cent scrap)
Electric arc furnaces (97 per-
cent scrap)
Iron foundries (—88 percent scrap).
Cement manufacture
Fossil fuels:
Petroleum (fuel oil plus gaso-
line)
Coal
Total
0.042
(?)
1.2-1.3?
. 35-. 48
.07?
>.06?
.7?
(?)
.0002
.097
.0002
.0001
. 00025
.01175
. 00025
.084
. 00015
.92
.07
.07?
.1
>. 0003
.68
6. 0-7. 4?
.03?
.03?
36-1.8?.
015? .
.40?
.38?
3.1?
.5
1.24
0. 70
.024
i2.4
.47
.73
.78
(7)
4. 2-4. 35
. 22-. 35
1.5
2 2.5
3. 2-7. 2
"\~65-.~16"
03
4.0
4.0
34.2
3 12.0
22.2
(?)
3.1
20. 8?
15.1?
5.7
5.5
.70
1.57
2.56
(?)
(?)
(?)
15-. 26
39.1
>26. 8-28.2?
9. 1-10. 6
69. 6-73. 6
78. 7-84. 2
failings ponds.
2 Residues probably held in inventory.
3Sewage sludge: lagooned, 3.2; landfilled, 6.3; landspreading, 2,500,000 troy ounces.
♦Dry surface piles: 7,800,000 troy ounces.
Of the ultimate potential for environmental impact from silver in.
cloud seeding, Howell concluded :
Cloud seeding, if it became widespread, would result in local, temporary concen-
trations [of silver] in precipitation of the same order of magnitude as the natural
concentration in surface waters [streams, lakes, rivers, etc.]. However, the rates
of exchange [of silver in surface waters] would remain more than one order of
magnitude smaller than the principal exchange [rates] affecting the aquatic de-
partment, and they would be many orders of magnitude smaller than those affect-
ing plants and soil, even in localized areas of precipitation management. Wide-
spread and prolonged precipitation management, using silver iodide as the cloud-
seeding agent and assuming that all the silver dispersed in the course of a century
accumulated in the top two centimeters of soil, would not cause the silver con-
centration there to exceed the normal background [levels].33
33 Howell. "Environmental Impacts of Precipitation Management" : Results and inferences
from Project Sky water, p. 497 (note 17).
496
Finally, a workshop of 18 scientists which met in 1976 to assess po-
tential environmental impacts of nucleating agents as used in weather
modification efforts concluded their review :
In summary, the members of the workshop felt that the points of major public
concern regarding nucleating agents (effects on plant growth, game animals and
fish, as points of special public interest) represented negligible environmental
hazards. The more subtle potential effects 'of silver-based nucleating agents, such
as a possible ability to potentiate the movement or effects of other materials of
environmental concern (other metals, pesticides, etc.) or their ability to influence
the activity of microorganisms in soils and aquatic environments,' particularly
after localized bioconcentration by plants, warrant continued research and moni-
toring activities, although any effects, if they might occur, are not expected to
involve unacceptable risks. The long term use of silver iodide, together with the
confidence which the weather modification profession has in delivery systems and
the efficacy of this material, make it unlikely that other agents will be used on
a large-scale basis in the future, unless improvements in delivery systems and
major changes in the economics of silver availability might occur.*4
Deliberate Weather Modification
Several forms of deliberate weather modification appear worthy of
serious consideration over the next few years to a decade or so. They in-
clude precipitation enhancement (or reduction), hurricane or other
severe storm abatement or other modification, fog dispersal, hail sup-
pression, and control of lightning. The following sections attempt to
encapsulate the best, current judgment about the ecological impacts or
other etl'ects of applied weather modification technology in each of
these categories.
PRECIPITATION ENHANCEMENT
In general efforts to alter (usually enhance) precipitation patterns
can 1 >e categorized as either attempts to increase rainfall or to augment
snowpack. In the former instance the modification primarily seeks to
benefit a local economy, usually by aiding crop production: in the lat-
ter case, modification is undertaken in one area in order to benefit resi-
dent of another, usually by augmenting the snowpack in watersheds to
increase water streamflows to the advantage of downstream users.35
/ nereased rainfall
Cooper and Jolly. Bureau of Reclamation, and Howell all provide
more complete discussions of the kinds of ecological effects which can be
expected. 1 [owell's treatment is excerpted here as follow- :
With respect to the vegetational characteristics of the environment, increasing
snmnier-convective precipitation is accompanied by a gradual transition from
desert shrnbland to short-grass prairie, to tall-grass prairie, to a sabana of mixed
grass and deciduous forest, and finally to forest * * *. Precipitation management
would tend ro shift the very diffuse boundaries of these grand divisions somewhat
westward * * *.
** Kle in. "Ecological Impacts of Nucleating Agents Used in Weather Modification Pro-'
grams" : an Interdisciplinary assessment, p. £T5 mote 154.
35 Cooper. "Ecological Implications of Weather Modification." p. 2 (note 9).
36 Cooper and Jolly. "Ecological Effects of Weather Modification : a Problem Analysis,"
p. 1 t note 1 i .
Bureau <>f Reclamation, Environmental statement for Project Skywater C note 14). How-
ell. "Environmental Impacts of Precipitation Management: Results and Inferences From
Proi«-r-t Skywater. ' p. 4sf> (note 17).
37 Howell. "Environmental Impacts of Precipitation Management : Results and Inference
Prom Project Skywater." p. 401 (note 17).
497
Precipitation management, to the extent that it may moderate the intensity of
extreme droughts, will cause the natural vegetation of each locality gradually
to resemble that of regions now slightly moister and may moderate the secular
changes in species composition that take place in response to normal climatic
fluctuations.
The effect of precipitation management on animal populations is likely to he
mainly indirect, through its influence on habitat, rather than directly on the
! organisms. Particularly in the case of birds and small mammals, populations
depend more on the presence of suitable cover, nest sites, and food supplies than
on the weather. Though severe storms at critical times may occasionally decimate
some species, there is little expectation that precipitation management would af-
fect the frequency of such occurrences.
The best expectation presently available of the impact of summer-convective
precipitation management is that each present environmental compartment would
gradually come to resemble neighboring compartments on the moister side of the
precipitation gradient, with no apparent risk of severe disturbances' accompany-
ing this transition.
Snow pack augmentaion
As part of the Bureau of Reclamation's Colorado River Basin pilot
project (to determine the effectiveness of seeding winter orographic
9y stems for increased snowpaek and spring runoff) , a 6-year, $1 million
research project was conducted to study the ecological impacts of snow-
pack augmentation in the San Juan Mountains of Colorado. The study
aimed to assess ecological effects of a theoretical increase in snowpaek
of 16 percent a year of average snowfall and to study the range of in-
crease up to 30 percent. The report, edited by Steinlioff and Ives, in-
cludes the results of a team of 33 scientists.38 The basic environmental
changes assessed were the addition of more snow and more silver.
Primary effects inpacting an ecosystem components were : "(1) lower
soil temperature in the spring, (2) more moisture in the spring, (3)
deeper snowpaek, and (4) more silver." 39 The following excerpts are
taken from the editors' "Summary of Key Conclusions" : 40
Initiation of shoot elongation was delayed for plants both in the tundra and
forests as a result of lower soil temperature associated with deeper snowpaek for
the species studied. These included Englemann Spruce (Picca engelmannii) ,
quaking aspen (Popirius tremuloides) , Thurber fescue (Fcstuca Thurbrrh, and
, numerous herbaceous species in both the tundra and forest meadows.
Only the lower soil temperature and greater snow depth, which might be ex-
pected to follow an increase in snowfall, have been found influential on animal
activity. A noticeable decline in forest populations of small mammals occurred fol-
lowing winters of heavy snowfall. This was most evident in the numbers of deer
mice (Peromyscus maniculatns) , but it was also found in chipmunks (Eutamias
minimus) and in Microtus spp. The basic reason for the population decline
derives from the delayed growth of essential spring foods and results primarily
from a delay in breeding so that fewer litters are produced. The delayed growth
of plants was a function of lower soil temperature and the longer snow cover.
As snow depth increased, elk (Cervus canadensis) moved to areas where snow
was shallower than 40 cm. They avoided regions with more than 70 cm of pene-
trable snow depth. A 15-percent increase in snowpaek may decrease available elk
winter range by 8 percent.
No significant increase in silver concentrations were found in the target area,
except in small areas near generator sites, after four winters of seeding. No*
deleterious effects of silver iodide additions have been noted to concentrations
which could be expected due to cloud seeding.
38 Steinhoff and Ives (eds.), "Ecological Impacts of Snowpaek Augmentation in the San
Juan Mountains, Colorado (note 11).
89 Ibid., p. 1.
40 Ibid.
498
Additional treatment of effects of snowpaek augmentation may be
found in the comprehensive report compiled by Weisbecker 41 and in
the paper of Howell.42 The latters "bottom line" conclusion, quoting
from Steinhoff and Ives? work, is :
There should he no immediate, large-scale impacts on the terrestrial ecosystems
of these [San Juan] mountains following an addition of up to 30 percent of the
normal snowpack, but with no addition to maximum snowpacks. Further, much
of the work reported here suggests that compensating mechanisms within the
studied ecosystems are such that any impacts would be buffered, at least for short
periods of time, and of lesser magnitude than the changes in snow conditions
required to produce them.
Our work has shown three ecosystem components to be most susceptible to
increased snowfall : (1) snowbank situations at elevations above treeline ; (2) elk
herds (in other mountain ranges other big game species may be similarly
affected) : and (3) some small mammal populations, especially the deer mouse.
Xot all of these impacts are necessarily deleterious; an increase in the area of
snowbank edge habitats in alpine areas may, for example, increase the niches
available for rare plant species.
Finally, even in the small areas where we predict greatest impacts from
increased snowfall, the changes involved are unlikely to approach the magnitude
of other man-made impacts on mountain ecosystems.
However, it should be remembered that they may act in phase with other
man-made impacts and with natural climatic changes, in which case the total
effect could be much greater than our studies suggest.
SEVERE STOR^r ABATEMENT
Essentially synonymous with hurricane control, this technology
offers some promise of mitigating the onshore impacts of such major
storms by reducing their intensity and/or altering their paths, both
through judicious seeding of the storm while still well out at sea. The
"state of the art" is such that few answers of the long-term ecological
( fleets of applying such a technology are available. Cooper and Jolly 43
sketched a number of possible implications and speculated about some
of the effects. More recently. Cooper identified a number of specific
questions lie felt should be addressed before hurricane modification
research is carried out on an extensive scale : 44
1. What is the importance of hurricanes in bringing precipitation to con-
tinental areas such as eastern U.S.? Will this delivery be affected by hurricane
modification? What fraction of hurricane precipitation is actually useful and
effective, and what fraction is primarily flood-producing? Will this ratio be
affected?
2. What is the role of hurricanes in the biology of coral reefs and in the pro-
ductivity of tropical marine fisheries? There is evidence that hurricanes improve
fishing in the Caribbean ( Florida) and in the Pacific. How would control affect
the livelihood of subsistence fishermen in the Pacific?
3. How important are hurricanes as determinants of forest structure an(
growth? Influences are known from St. Vincent, New England, and tbe Solomoi
Islands, among others.
Clearly there may l>e significant ecological ramifications on severa
scales if severe storm abatement technology is applied. Yet, good re
sea rcli answers are seemingly still a ways off.
*' Welsbecker, "The Impact of Snow Enhancement," p. xil. 20f* -352 (note 101.
48 Howell, "Environmental Impacts of Precipitation Management : Results and Infer
encee From Project Skywater,*' p. 4!>4 (note 17).
1 Cooper ana Jolly, Ecological effects of weather modification: a problem analysis, Dp
85 88 i Note 1).
** Cooper. Ecological Implications of weather modification (Note 9).
499
FOG DISPERSAL
Cold fog dispersal is now rather easily effected locally, principally
over airports, although warm fog dispersal remains more difficult and
expensive. Cooper and Jolly foresaw no significant ecological effect
, from the expected kinds of fog dispersal in the 1969 report 45 and that
conclusion was more recently restated by Cooper.46
HAIL SUPPRESSION
An interdisciplinary assessment of hail suppression in the past, pres-
ent, and future has been recently reported.47 The authors concluded
the technology is currently scientifically uncertain but potentially
beneficial, and one which would be widely adopted in the Great
Plains with benefits to agriculture and the American consumer.48 As
recently as 1977, Cooper concluded that hail suppression technology
offers no likely ecological implications beyond those associated with
the effects on precipitation which would presumably attend its appli-
cations.49
ALTERATION OR ARREST OF LIGHTNING DISCHARGES
As is the case with hail suppression technology, there does not seem
to be reason to anticipate any significant ecological effects from ap-
plying lightning alteration efforts beyond those to be associated with
precipitation affects. Again, Cooper and Jolly largely dismissed any
grounds for significant ecological concern with respect to lightning
modification in 1969 50 and Cooper in 1977 reiterated that posi-
tion.01
Inadvertent Weather Modification
Inadvertent weather modification can be defined to include both un-
intended effects on nontarget areas of deliberate modifications aimed
at target areas, and of totally unintended modifications as a result of
man's activities not related to planned weather influences or opera-
tions. Regardless of the category, however, there are ecological rami-
fications involved.
EXTRA-AREA EFFECTS
Concern with extra area, usually downwind, effects is almost as old
as weather modification efforts themselves. The most common public
concern has been of the "rob Peter to pay Paul" variety wherein it is
alleged or at least feared that increased moisture for A's benefit
through cloud seeding must come from a B, at some point. Howell has
written the following summary conclusions about effects of cloud seed-
ing on precipitation in nearby areas ; "the assumption that augmenta-
tion of precipitation in one place must result in its diminution some-
43 Cooper and Jolly, "Ecological Effects of Weather Modification : A Problem Analysis,"
p. 83 (Note 1).
46 Cooper. "Ecological Implications of Weather Modification." p. 15 (Note 9).
47 Changnon. et al., "Hail Suppression : Impacts and Issues" (Note 12) ; Stanley Chang-
non. Barbara C. Farhar, and Earl R. Swanson, "Hail Suppression and Society." Science 200
(4840) (28 April 1978) : p. 387.
4S Changnon. Farhar, and Swanson, "Hail Suppression and Society," p. 387 (Note 47).
49 Cooper, "Ecological Implications of Weather Modification," p. 14 (Note 9).
50 Cooper and Jolly, "Ecological Effects of Weather Modification : A Problem Analysis"
(Note 1).
51 Cooper, "Ecological Implications of Weather Modification," p. 14 (Note 9).
500
where else is plausible but fallacious." He continues, "The fallacy lies
in failure to appreciate (1) the role of natural atmospheric disturb-
ances in causing the convergence and ascent of moist air as the domi-
nant mechanism that makes moisture available for cloud formation
and (2) the potential of cloud seeding both for increasing the dynamic
energy of such disturbances and for increasing the efficiency with
which the storm clouds are converted to precipitation. * * * Model
studies of convective rain clouds are not far enough advanced to pre-
dict the outcomes with high confidence, but at least they offer no encour-
agement to the notion that cloud seeding robs Peter to pay Paul." 52
Howell adds: "Studies of rainfall downwind from actual summer-
convective cloud seeding operations have been inconclusive, with the
evidence tending to favor some increase out to distances of 400 kilo-
meters or so. However, the types of operations involved have been so
disparate that no general conclusions are possible. Studies of precipi-
tation downwind of winter-orographic cloud-seeding operations con-
firm the presence of increases at distances of approximately 250 kilo-
meters. The evidence, therefore, does not support the notion that
stimulation of precipitation in one area deprives another area but sug-
gests that seeding may strengthen existing precipitation systems." 53
A fuller treatment of extra area effects is provided in chapter 3 of
this CRS weather modification report.
LONG-TERM, CLIMATIC AXD GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS
Finally, it is desirable to point out that alteration of weather
brought about by cloud seeding or other deliberate interference with
atmospheric processes will necessarily be superimposed against the
record of long-term, natural changes of climate and the ubiquitous,
year-to-year variability of climate and, in addition, any inadvertent
effects attributable to human activities. The evolution of natural cli-
matic change and variability and the possibility that society, through
its own actions, may be altering the climate by pushing on certain
leverage points make it more difficult to assess the reality of planned
weather modification, because claimed results may in fact be due to
other causes. Furthermore, the ecological effects of a planned weather
change may be partially masked by unanticipated changes in other
climatic variables.54
While man lias become generally aware of some of the environ-
mental effects of his polluting the air and waters of the planet, he has
barely begun to credibly study the global implications of long-term
climatic change which may be exacerbated or even caused by his inad-
vertent impacts on global atmospheric and oceanic processes. "While
no solid ecological answers are yet demonstrable, the implications of
industrially caused acid rains, impacts on the carbon dioxide cycle of
deforestation as well as the burning of fossil fuels and similar scale
concerns are all terribly Serious. Cooper has recently articulated some
of these concerns, too.55
•r-2 Howell. "Environmental Impacts of Procinitntion Management : Results ami Inferences
From Project Skywater," pp. 491-402 (Note 17).
•"-'! Ibid,, p. 402.
M fuopor and .Tollv, "Ecological Effects of Weather Modification : A Problem Analysis,'*
p. 17 (Note 1).
w Cooper, "What Mipht Man-Induced Climate Change Mean?" (Note 9).
501
A comprehensive and detailed discussion of inadvertent weather
and climate modification appears in chapter 4 of this CES text on
weather modification.
Summary and Conclusions
This chapter seeks to review a number of recent studies aimed at ad-
dressing and answering questions about the ecological effects of vari-
ous kinds of weather modification activity. In general, the body of di-
rected research with respect to these concerns is still limited but sig-
nificantly greater than was the case a decade or even less ago.
Economically significant weather modification will always have an
eventual ecological effect, although appearance of that effect may be
delayed or hidden by system resilience and/or confounded by system
complexity.
It will never be possible to predict "the ecological effects of weather
modification." However, the more precisely the weather modifier can
specify the effects he will produce in terms of average percentage in-
crease or decrease in precipitation (or other climatic variable), ex-
pected seasonal distribution of the change, expected year-to-year dis-
tribution of the change, geographic distribution of the change, changes
in relative form of precipitation, and the like, the more precise can be
the ecologist's prediction of likely ecological effects.
Ecological effects of weather modification will be the result of
moderate shifts in rates of reproduction, growth, and mortality of
species of plants and animals which are sensitive to weather. Effects
will rarely, if ever, be sudden or catastrophic because plant and ani-
mal communities react to changes in climate much more than changes
in weather. Accordingly, those modifications in the weather which
occur with significant regularity over time — eventually constituting at
least a micro-climatic shift of some degree — are the ones to which bio-
logical communities will react.
Animal populations will rarely be affected directly by weather mod-
ification activities but will rather be indirectly affected as their
habitat is altered as vegetative changes occur.
T\reather modification, being a change imposed on an already vari-
able climate, will nevertheless have an inexorable, if subtle, effect on
long-term structure of plant and animal communities as they respond
to average climatic conditions.
Such adjustments of plants and animal communities will usually
occur more slowly in regions of highly variable weather than in those
of relatively uniform weather conditions. Similarly, deliberate pre-
cipitation change is likely to have greater ecological impact in semi-
arid systems and less in humid ones.
Widespread cloud seeding could result in local, temporary concen-
trations of silver in precipitation which are of the same order of mag-
nitude as the natural concentration in surface waters, though the rates
of exchange would remain more than an order of magnitude smaller
than principal exchanges for the aquatic environment. Exchange rates
would be many orders of magnitude smaller than those affecting
plants and soil, even in localized areas of precipitation management.
It is still a reality that our level of ignorance of ecological effects of
changes in weather and climate exceeds our level of knowledge.
APPENDIXES
Appendix A
Statement ox Weather [Modification in Congressional Record of
June 17, 1975, by Congressman Gilbert Gude, Containing White
House Statement on Federal Weather Modification Policy
Weather modification
(Mr. Gude asked and was given permission to extend bis remarks at this
point in the Record and to include extraneous matter.)
Mr. Gude. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to my colleagues' attention an
exchange of correspondence Senator Pell, Congressman Fraser, and I have
recently had with the White House concerning Federal weather modification ac-
tivities. On April 23, we wrote the President the following letter urging the crea-
tion of a lead agency to coordinate Federal work on weather modification and
urging that such research be conducted by civilian agencies rather than the De-
fense Department :
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C\, April 23, 197o.
The President.
The WJiite House.
Dear Mr. President : As authors of several resolutions for outlawing environ-
mental modification as a weapon of war, we now write recommending govern-
ment work in the peaceful uses of such modification that could help to promote-
energy conservation, safeguard the environment and stabilize agricultural produc-
tion. In sending these recommendations, we wish to make clear that we support
continued research, particularly into weather modification for peaceful purposes,
regarding which we believe there currently exist numerous opportunities for its
applications.
The role of weather modification in energy conservation was sharply outlined
in a recent example which came to our attention. Coming from Boston to Washing-
ton, a recent flight was delayed by bad weather and according to one passenger's
calculations, as much fuel was exhausted around Washington while the plane
waited to land as was consumed during the entire flight from Boston. This is only
one example of the energy costs of bad weather, but weather conditions being
what they are, it is a frequent case. Research into fog dissipation is precisely the
kind of work which can reduce those costs.
We are only beginning to research and understand how our own industrial
development has inadvertently modified weather and environment. Studies are
beginning to show differences in temperature and air quality over urban and in-
dustrial areas, which affected the immediate environment as well as influence
weather downwind. There is sufficient growing suspicion that inadvertent environ-
mental modification can help produce extremes of weather, such as drought, to
warrant further investigation and research.
The implications of weather modification for agriculture are obvious and vari-
ous efforts to enhance rainfall have been going on for years. These efforts, how-
ever, need coordination and careful study to help determine what approaches are
productive, what types of weather formation are most susceptible to modification
and how modification in one area affects weather elsewhere. Clearly, the potential
for increased agriculture output — both domestically and worldwide — is great.
(503)
504
Given these opportunities, it is unfortunate that civilian directed research has
been diffused. The fiscal 1975 budget shows weather modification projects in six
agencies and a division by function as follows:
Fiscal year—
1973
1974 1975
Department of Agriculture.
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Army
366
4,779
(1,209)
160
270
4, 673
<...«>
150
4, 575
(1,300)
Navy.
Air Force
Department of the Interior
Department of Transportation
National Science Foundation
404
645
6,370
1,067
5,790
399
666
3, 900
1,397
4, 000
555
745
3 445
1,520
4, 270
Total
19,581
15, 401
15,270
DIVISION BY FUNCTION
Fiscal year —
1973 1974
1975 Agencies
Precipitation modification .
Fog and cloud modification 1.
Hail suppression..
lightning modification
Hurricane and severe storm modification
Social, economic, legal, and ecological studies
Inadvertent modification of weather and climate
Support and services.
5,472 3,735
1,541 1,194
2, 860 2, 000
624 330
1,818 1,741
1, 740 1, 310
3, 252 3, 643
2,274 1,475
3,279 DOC, DOI.
1,264 DOD, DOT.
2,100 NSF.
356 DOA, DOD, NSF
1,816 DOC.
1,110 DOI, NSF.
4, 398 DOC, DOT, NSF.
937 DOC, DOI, NSF.
Total
19,581 15,401
15, 270
Although in some respects the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Ad-
ministration gathers data on all these projects, it does not really function as a
lead agency or exert sufficient direction, coordination or control over the civilian
or military projects. It is clear from the second chart, furthermore, that consider-
able overlap and possible duplication exists. We believe, however, that in a field
as diverse and speculative as this, a greater degree of centralization is desirable.
This same recommendation has been made on a number of occasions by the Na-
tional Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere:
NACOA finds that, although we appear to stand on the threshold of practical
weather modification, and some facets are operational, in other applications a
sroat deal of complex research still needs to be done. Unless the scientific man-
power and funding are better directed, we assuredly will continue to make very
slow progress towards weather control. NACOA therefore reiterates its recom-
mendations of last year that :
"The many small programs in weather modification now scattered widely
through the Federal agencies be focused and coordinated under NOAA's head ;
basic cloud physics and dynamics be given higher priority; and that the legal,
social, and economic impact of weather modification be thoroughly examined and
;appropriate regulatory and licensing legislation be sought." (A Refrort to the
President and the Congress, NACOA. June 29, 1973, page viii.)
We also believe it is particularly important that any such coordination should
be in the hands of a civilian agency; indeed, that all such research should be
conducted by civilian agencies.
Considerable doubt has been raised in the past over the nature of some of the
research conducted by the Defense Department in the area of weather modifica-
tion. You will recall the not too successful efforts to increase rainfall over the
Ho Chi Minh Trail several years ago at a cost of $21. G million. We have grave
doubts about the merits of any project such as this, but we are also concerned
about the way in which the incident was handled by the Government. The proj-
ect was at first flatly — and repeatedly — denied publicly and before Congress
by the Department of Defense, but the basic facts were ultimately conceded some
505
vears later by former Defense Secretary Laird in a letter to the Senate forfagn
Relations Committee, which confirmed the allegations that had been made.
Such incidents have given rise to continuing concern on our part over the scope
of federal research and development on environmental and weather modifica-
tion What is significant about these incidents is that they continue to occur in
respect to Defense Department research, even though DOD asserts such research
has only peaceful applications, such as airport fog dispersal. If this is the case,
then it would seem both logical and appropriate to place such research in civilian
agencies where it can be carried on with the same degree of precision and success,
since weapons' applications are not involved, and where it would not cause new
suspicions about the real nature of the work.
Weather modification is a field of great potential, promising considerable bene-
fits to agriculture and transportation, to mention only two prime areas of re-
seach. At the same time the potential military applications of weather modifica-
tion research are serious. Last summer's agreement with the Soviet Union to meet
to discuss a ban on weather warfare is most encouraging. We hope that in the
light of that agreement, you will be able to give favorable consideration to our
recommendations.
Sincerely,
Gilbert Gude.
Member of Congress.
Claiborne Pell,
U.S. Senator.
Donald M. Fraser,
Member of Congress.
On June 5, we received the following response from Norman E. Ross, Jr., As-
sistant Director of the Domestic Council :
The White House,
Washington, June 5, 1915.
Hon. Gilbert Gude,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Gude : The President has asked me to respond to your letter of April
23, 1975, in which you recommended a coordinated program of governmental work
in the peaceful uses of weather modification.
A considerable amount of careful thought and study has been devoted to the
subject of weather modification and what the Federal role and, in particular, the
role of various agencies should be in this area. As a result of this study, we have-
developed a general strategy for addressing weather modification efforts which
we believe provides for an appropriate level of coordination.
For the most part, as your letter points out, we are just beginning to under-
stand the possibilities for weather modification and the complexities that are in-
volved. Inadvertent modification of weather and environment through industrial
development is indeed a prime example.
There are many problems generated by various weather phenomena such as
loss of crops through hail damage and destruction of property caused by hurri-
canes and flooding. In many cases the approaches to solving the problems
may or may not be best met through weather modification techniques. Other
solutions such as community preparedness, better land use planning, and pro-
tective measures may more effectively and realistically achieve the objectives.
For this reason, we believe that the agency which is charged with a particular
national problem should be given the latitude to seek the best approach or solu-
tion to the problem. In some instances this may involve a form of weather modi-
fication, while in other instances other approaches may be more appropriate.
While we would certainly agree that some level of coordination of weather
modification research efforts is logical, we do not believe that a program under
the direction of any one single agency's leadership is either necessary or de-
sirable. We have found from our study that the types of scientific research con-
ducted by agencies are substantially different in approach, techniques, and type-
of equipment employed, depending on the particular weather phenomena beings
addressed. For example, there is very little in common between hurricane sup-
pression and attempting to increase rain or snow. Fog dispersal efforts have al-
most nothing in common with any other weather modification. Each type of
weather modification requires a different form of program management and there?
are few common threads which run among all programs.
.506
To tlie extent that there are common problems and solutions among the pro-
grams, the Interagency Committee on Atmosphere Sciences (ICAS) is bringing
together agency representatives who are involved in weather modification re-
search, for the purpose of sharing their ideas and approaches to various prob-
lems. In addition, a series of lead agencies have been established to concentrate
efforts in particular areas: Interior in precipitation; Agriculture in lightning
suppression ; Commerce in severe storms, including hurricanes ; NSF in hail re-
search : and Transportation in fog suppression. These lead roles provide for co-
ordination in areas with common characteristics and have gone a long way
toward eliminating duplicative efforts. Although more than one agency is in-
volved in a general area such as inadvertent modification, their efforts are keyed
toward particular objectives.
I hope this information will be helpful to you and I would like to thank you for
sharing your views with us. We would be happy to provide you any additional
information you may need concerning current efforts in the weather modification
area.
Sincerely,
Norman E. Ross, Jr.,
Assistant Director, Domestic Council.
The administration's response is disappointing that it rejects the recommenda-
tion of a lead agency, despite the fact that the National Advisory Committee
on Oceans and Atmosphere has regularly recommended it. The reply ignores
completely the crucial second point of military involvement in weather modifica-
tion research. I commented on this problem in some detail in my testimony of
September 24, 1974, before the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International
Organizations and Movements :
"DANGERS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION CONTROL
'•Why should we be so alarmed about a technique that is not nearly as lethal as
other forms of warfare? First, there are distinct control and command problems
associated with geophysical warfare and weather modification in particular. We
simply do not have effective short or long term control over the climates of the
world. We can create certain disturbances, but as civilian experiments have
shown, control is not precise. In a military environment, control over the results
of weather experimentation is even more uncertain in respect to military targets,
and there is practically no hope of preventing military efforts from spilling over
into civilian life with devastating effect, particularly in developing agricultural
countries. Here, wind changes, rainfall changes, or even changes in the composi-
tion of rain could seriously disrupt the livelihood of most of the country's citizens
and create severe food supply problems, all far distant from the chosen military
target. This is partly due to the so-called downwind effect, carrying weather
changes with weather movements. But weather unpredictability — enhanced by
modification efforts themselves — may make it impossible to determine where
'downwind' will be at any given time. This means that the use of weather modi-
fication is inevitably indiscriminate. We cannot flood only military targets or
cause drought in areas producing only military rations. The technology will be
used against people regardless of their uniform or occupation and will inevitably
strike civilians harder than nearby military objectives.
•"The command problem is no less acute. Since the technology to date doe> not
involve great eXpense or sophisticated equipment, it is not difficult to imagine the
use of weather modification by many different military subunits. In fact, there
have been reports that we have trained the South Vietnamese to use weather
modification. There are no double-key sating mechanisms here, no exclusive
possession as with nuclear weapons.
"DANGERS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION — IDENTIFICATION* AM) DETECTION
•"These issues of command and control highlight another disturbing characteris-
tic of weather modification, the difficulty of detection. Unlike other weapons, it
may be possible to initiate military weather modification projects without being
detected. In other words, the military results may not be visibly tied to the initiat-
ing party. This raises the possibility of the clandestine use of geophysical warfare
where a country does not know if it has been attacked. The uncertainty of this
situation, the fear of not knowing how another country may be altering your
507
climate is highly destabilizing. This feeding of national paranoia — a pervading
suspicion of the motives and actions of a neighboring country — could well be
amplified into the laying of blame for any adverse climate conditions or weather
disasters on one's neighbors.
"This was clearly brought home by the recent admission of the Department of
Defense that it had indeed been involved in weather modification activities in
Southeast Asia from 1967 to 1972, even at a time when Department witnesses
were denying such involvement in their congressional testimony.
"In a January 28, 1974, letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
former Defense Secretary Laird corrected his testimony of April 18, 1972, in
which he stated. 'We have never engaged in that type of activity over North
Vietnam.' Laird admitted that just such activities were conducted over North
Vietnam in 1967 and 1968. It was clearly one of the most useless programs ever
conceived by the Government. This rainmaking effort accomplished nothing except
washing $21.6 million down the drain, and it was undertaken with no thought
as to the very dangerous situations which could evolve from such a policy.
''effects of weather modification research
"There is no question that much valuable research is now being done under the
heading of weather modification. Airport fog dispersal operations, cloud seeding
in farm areas threatened by drought, efforts to increase the winter snow pack,
and experiments in hurricane control are all legitimate scientific efforts that
can meet important domestic and international needs. This work into peaceful
applications of environmental modification technology should continue. Un-
fortunately, Pentagon involvement in weather modification research — whether
classified or for peaceful purposes — has serious consequences for the U.S. civilian
scientific community, the American public, and the international community.
"Geophysical warfare, to use a figure of speech, can poison the atmosphere
surrounding legitimate international programs such as the global atmospheric
research program, the international hydrological decade and meteorology in
general. We have already seen that it caused the U.S. delegation at the Stock-
holm Conference to water down a recommendation on climate changes. The po-
tential for embarrassment is great.
"Our scientific community could come under suspicion or attack at these inter-
national meetings. The fine work and trust built up over the years by our excel-
lent atmospheric scientists could be dispelled in one stroke of Pentagon experi-
mentation.
•'But it is not only our scientists who lose credibility — it is the Defense Depart-
ment itself. Through its involvement in research which may have military appli-
cations, even though it is intended for peaceful purposes, the Pentagon has laid
itself open to allegations of a variety of clandestine activities.
"Two cases will illustrate the point. The Defense Department engages in con-
siderable medical research, some of which is related exclusively to military needs,
while some parallel research carried out by civilian institutions. The Navy, for
example, has had a research unit in Egypt studying equatorial diseases for many
years. By conducting such research 'in-house,' so to speak, instead of obtaining
it through civilian research agencies, the Navy leaves itself open to charges
that it is actually studying or developing germ warfare or the like. As unfounded
as such charges may be. they are very difficult to combat, especially in the cur-
rent climate of suspicion about many Pentagon activities. Yet. there is no reason
why this kind of research could not be conducted by the civilian agencies of
Government and its results made available to the Defense Department. In cases
where Defense required information on subjects not currently under investiga-
tion, it could levy requirements on the National Science Foundation which would
in turn conduct or contract for the needed research, thus reducing the opportu-
nities for controversy to develop, controversy which might itself hamper research,
especially abroad.
"In the area of weather modification. I have been assured that Air Force interest
in these techniques is limited to developing methods for airfield fog dispersal or
suppression and other life-saving measures. These techniques are just as im-
portant to business and civil aviation and the general public, and there is no
reason why such research cannot be conducted by a civilian agency.
"As a general principle, therefore. I would urge that wherever an adequate
scientific base exists for conducting specific types of applied research outside
of the Department of Defense and associated agencies, if would be wise policy
508
to conduct all such research through non-defense agencies, such as NOAA, NIH,.
XSF or private institutions. In addition to helping resolve Pentagon credibility
problems, such a procedure will tend to reduce duplication of effort and may
therefore produce some cost savings.
"Thus, although the subject of this hearing is an international treaty banning
the use of weather modification techniques as weapons, it is important that we
gjo beyond that and deal directly with the development of such research within
our own Government, so as to clearly divorce all weather modification activities
from the military and leave no doubt that American interest in this field is
strictly peaceful and humanitarian."
This administration and its predecessor have made progress toward an inter-
national treaty banning the use of weather modification as a weapon of war,
but neither administration has really understood the important link between
banning weather warfare and taking weather modification research out of the
hands of the military. We cannot credibly negotiate a weather warfare treaty at
the same time we are funding classified Defense Department research projects in
weather modification. Since the Defense Department has maintained that its re-
search only involves peaceful applications, it is difficult to understand why such
research cannot be placed in civilian hands. The administration is unwilling to
move in that direction, and legislative action may be necessary. I am in the
process of preparing just that, and I plan shortly to submit my proposals for
House consideration.
Appendix B
Department of Defense Statement on Position on
Weather Modification
Position on Weather Modification 1
Based on extant theories and demonstrated technology, weather modification
has little utility as a weapon of war. Conventional arms are more effective
instruments of warfare. While weather modification experiments in Vietnam
demonstrated the technical ability to increase rainfall, its military payoff was
nil. Unless there is a major scientific breakthrough which would allow the use
of weather modification as a weapon, we see little value in continued weather
modification development toward this end. However, DoD must continue to
have the option to conduct reesarch and development to exploit emerging tech-
nology and to avoid technological surprise.
Weather modification can enhance the effectiveness of conventional weapons,
particularly aircraft and helicopter forces. The primary impediment to aircraft
operations is the visibility at airfields and visibility over target. The DoD should
pursue technology to dissipate fog and clouds for the purposes of increasing
visibility, and thus conventional weapons effectiveness. We employ operationally
cold fog dissipators at those military airfields affected by cold fog and fund a
significant development program in airfield warm fog dissipation. At the same
time, we continue to work on technology to clear fog and clouds in a battlefield
area.
The future direction of the DoD weather modification program is influenced
not only by our perceptions of the usefulness of the technology, but also by the
Environmental Modification Convention. The Environmental Modification Con-
vention constrains the use of military weather modification activities to those
not having widespread, long-lasting, or severe effects. The effect of the Environ-
mental Modification Convention, when superimposed on our present perceptions
of technology, is to further devalue the development of weather modification
as a weapon of war. As a result, our present efforts are directed solely at fog
and cloud dissipation.
Insights into the future directions and potential of weather modification will
derive from fundamental research in atmospheric physics and atmospheric proc-
esses, and not from applied technology experiments in weather modification.
DoD will continue to support a vigorous program in basic research in cloud
physics and atmospheric dynamics. We are jointly funding with NASA experi-
ments to be conducted in the NASA cloud physics laboratory to be flown on the
space shuttle. DoD laboratories and contract programs fund a broad spectrum
of fundamental research into the atmosphere.
1 Provided April 5, 1978, by Col. Elbert W. Friday, Office of tbe Under Secretary of De-
fense for Research and Engineering, in a briefing to representatives of the Weather Modi-
fication Advisory Board and from several Federal agencies.
(509)
34-857—79 35
Appendix C
Text of United Xatioxs Convention ox- the Prohibition of Mili-
tary or Axy Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification
Techniques
Text of Resolution 1
The General Assembly.
Recalling its resolutions 3264 (XXIX) of 9 December 1974 and 3475 (XXX)
of 11 December 1975,
Recalling its resolution 1722 (XVI) of 20 December 1961, in which it recognized
that all States have a deep interest in disarmament and arms control negotiations,
Determined to avert the potential dangers of military or any other hostile use
of environmental modification techniques,
Convinced that broad adherence to a convention on the prohibition of such
action would contribute to the cause of strengthening peace and averting the
threat of war,
Noting with satisfaction that the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament
lias completed and transmitted to the General Assembly, in the report of its
work in 1976, the text of a draft Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any
Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques,
Noting further that the Convention is intended to prohibit effectively military
or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques in order to
eliminate the dangers to mankind from such use,
Bearing in mind that draft agreements on disarmament and arms control
measures submitted to the General Assembly by the Conference of the Committee
on Disarmament should be the result of a process of effective negotiations and
that such instruments should duly take into account the views and interests of all
States so that they can be joined by the widest possible number of countries,
Bearing in mind that article VII of the Convention makes provision for a con-
ference to review the operation of the Convention five years after its entry into
force, with a view to ensuring that its purposes and provisions are being realized.
Also bearing in mind all relevant documents and negotiating records of the
Conference of the Committee on Disarmament on the discussion of the draft
Convention.
Convinced that the Convention should not affect the use of environmental modi-
fication techniques for peaceful purposes, which could contribute to the preserva-
tion and improvement of the environment for the benefit of present and future
generations,
Convinced that the Convention will contribute to the realization of the purposes
and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
Anxious that during its 1977 session the Conference of the Committee on Dis-
armament should concentrate on urgent negotiations on disarmament and arms
limitation measures,
1. Refers the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile
Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, the text of which is annexed to
the present resolution, to all States for their consideration, signature and
ratification :
2. Requests the Secretary-General as depositary of the Convention, to open it
for signature and ratification at the earliest possible date :
1 A/RES/31/72 (text from U.N. floe. A/31/382, report of the First Committee on agenda
''•'■!•' A Convention on the prohibition of military or any other hostile use of environmental
modification techniques-) ; adopted by the committee on Dee. 3 by a recorded vote of 89
fTT.S.) to 11, with 2."» abstentions, and by the Assembly on Dee. 10 by a recorded vote of 96
(V.S. i to S. with :;0 ahstentions.
(510)
511
3. Expresses its hope for the widest possible adherence to the Convention ;
4. Galls upon the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament, without
prejudice to the priorities established in its programme of work, to keep under
review the problem of effectively averting the dangers of military or any other
hostile use of environmental modification techniques ;
5. Requests the Secretary-General to transmit to the Conference of the Com-
mittee on Disarmament all documents relating to the discussion by the General
Assembly at its thirty-first session of the question of the prohibition of military
or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques.
Annex
Convention ox the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of
Environmental Modification Techniques
The States Parties to this Convention,
(lidded by the interest of consolidating peace, and wishing to contribute to the
cause of halting the arms race, and of bringing about general and complete dis-
armament under strict and effective international control, and of saving mankind
from the danger of using new means of warfare,
Determined to continue negotiations with a view to achieving effective prog-
ress towards further measures in the field of disarmament,
Recognizing that scientific and technical advances may open new possibilities
with respect to modification of the environment,
Recalling the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human
Environment, adopted at Stockholm on 16 June 1972,
Realizing that the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful
purposes could improve the interrelationship of man and nature and contribute
to the preservation and improvement of the environment for the benefit of pres-
ent and future generations,
Recognising, however, that military or any other hostile use of such techniques
Could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare.
Desiring to prohibit effectively military or any other hostile use of environ-
mental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind
from such use. and affirming their willingness to work towards the achievement
of this objective.
Desiring also to contribute to the strengthening of trust among nations and
to further improvement of the international situation in accordance with the
purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
Have agreed as follows :
Article I
1. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military
or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having wide-
spread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or
injury to any other State Party.
2. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to assist, encourage
or induce any State, group of States or international organization to engage in
activities contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.
Article II
As used in article I. the term "environmental modification techniques'' refers
to any technique for changing — through the deliberate manipulation of natural
processes — the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth, including its
biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere, and atmosphere, or of outer space.
Article III
1. The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmental
modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to
generally recognized principles and applicable rules of international law con-
cerning such use.
2. The States Parties to this Convention undertake to facilitate, and have the
right to participate in. the fullest possible exchange of scientific and techno-
logical information on the use of environmental modification techniques for
peaceful purposes. States Parties in a position to do so shall contribute, alone
512
or together with other States or international organizations, to international
economic and scientific co-operation in the preservation, improvement, and
peaceful utilization of the environment, with due consideration for the needs of
the developing areas of the world.
Article IV
Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to take any measures it con-
siders necessary in accordance with its constitutional processes to prohibit and
prevent any activity in violation of the provisions of the Convention anywhere
under its jurisdiction or control.
Article V
1. The States Parties to this Convention undertake to consult one another and
to co-operate in solving any problems which may arise in relation to the objec-
tives of, or in the application of the provisions of, the Convention. Consultation
and co-operation pursuant to this article may also be undertaken through appro-
priate international procedures within the framework of the United Nations and
in accordance with its Charter. These international procedures may include the
services of appropriate international organizations, as well as of a consultative
committee of experts as provided for in paragraph 2 of this article.
2. For the purposes set forth in paragraph 1 of this article, the Depositary
shall, within one month of the receipt of a request from any State Party, con-
vene a consultative committee of experts. Any State Party may appoint an
expert to this committee whose functions and rules of procedure are set out in
the annex, which constitutes an integral part of this Convention. The commit-
tee shall transmit to the Depositary a summary of its findings of fact, incorpo-
rating all views and information presented to the committee during its pro-
ceedings. The Depositary shall distribute the summary to all States Parties.
3. Any State Party to this Convention which has reasons to believe that any
other State Party is acting in breach of obligations deriving from the provisions
of the Convention may lodge a complaint with the Security Council of the United
Nations. Such a complaint should include all relevant information as well as all
possible evidence supporting its validity.
4. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to co-operate in carrying
out any investigation which the Security Council may initiate, in accordance
with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, on the basis of the
complaint received by the Council. The Security Council shall inform the States
Parties to the Convention of the results of the investigation.
5. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to provide or support assist-
ance, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations,
to any Party to the Convention which so requests, if the Security Council decides
that such Party has been harmed or is likely to be harmed as a result of violation
of the Convention.
Article VI
1. Any State Party may proposed amendments to this Convention. The text
of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Depositary, who shall
promptly circulate it to all States Parties.
2. An amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties which have ac-
cepted it, upon the deposit with the Depositary of instruments of acceptance by
a majority of States Parties. Thereafter it shall enter into force for any re-
maining State Party on the date of deposit of its instrument of acceptance.
Article VII
This Convention shall be of unlimited duration.
Article VIII
1. Five years after the entry into force of this Convention, a conference of the
State Parties to the Convention shall be convened by the Depositary at Geneva.
The conference shall review the operation of the Convention with a view to en-
suring thfit its purposes and provisions are being realized, and shall in particular
examine the effectiveness of the provisions of article T. paragraph 1. in eliminat-
ing the dangers of military or any other hostile use of environmental modification
techniques.
513
2. At intervals of not less than five years thereafter, a majority of the States
Parties to this Convention may obtain, by submitting a proposal to this effect to
the Depositary, the convening of a conference with the same objectives.
3. If no review conference has been convened pursuant to paragraph 2 of this
article within 10 years following the conclusion of a previous review conference,
the Depositary shall solicit the views of all States Parties to this Convention on
the holding of such a conference. If one third or 10 of the States Parties, which-
ever number is less, respond affirmatively, the Depositary shall take immediate
steps to convene the conference.
Article IX
1. This Convention shall be open to all States for signature. Any State which
does not sign the Convention before its entry into force in accordance with para-
graph 3 of this article may accede to it at any time.
2. This Convention shall be subject to ratification by signatory States. Instru-
ments of ratification and instruments of accession shall be deposited with the
Secretary-General of the United Nations.
3. This Convention shall enter into force upon the deposit with the Depositary
of instruments of ratification by 20 Governments in accordance with paragraph
2 of this article.
4. For those States whose instruments of ratification or accession are deposited
after the entry into force of this Convention, it shall enter into force on the date
of the deposit of their instruments of ratification or accession.
5. The Depositary shall promptly inform all signatory and acceding States of
the date of each signature, the date of deposit of each instrument of ratification
oi^ of accession and the date of the entry into force of this Convention and of
any amendments thereto, as well as of the receipt of other notices.
6. This Convention shall be registered by the Depositary in accordance with
Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.
Article X
This Convention of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, and
Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General
of the United Nations who shall send certified copies thereof to the Govern-
ments of the signatory and acceding States.
In Witness Whereof, the undersigned, duly authorized thereto, have signed
this Convention.
Done at On
Annex to the Convention
Consultative Committee of Experts
1. The Consultative Committee of Experts shall undertake to make appro-
priate findings of fact and provide expert views relevant to any problem raised
pursuant to article V, paragraph 1. of this Convention by the State Party re-
questing the convention of the Committee.
2. The work of the Consultative Committee of Experts shall be organized in
such a way as to permit it to perforin the functions set forth in paragraph 1 of
this annex. The Committee shall decide procedural questions relative to the
organization of its work, where possible by consensus, but otherwise by a ma-
jority of those present and voting. There shall be no voting on matters of
substance.
3. The Depositary or his representative shall serve as the Chairman of the
Committee.
4. Each expert may lie assisted at meetings by one or more advisers.
5. Each expert shall have the right, through the Chairman, to request from
States, and from international organizations, such information and assistance
as the expert considers desirable for the accomplishment of the Committee's
work.
Appendix D
State Statutes Concerning Weather Modification
Twenty-nine States were found which have some type of statute discussing
weather modification. These state statutes were found by an examination of the
indices to the state codes under the topics weather modification, climate control
and cloud seeding. Statutes which have been repealed are not included.1
The following chart divides the types of weather modification statutes into
three main categories : comprehensive, licensing and other. The comprehensive
category would include those statutes which include provisions relating not only
to licensing but also to general policy, liability, etc. State statutes put in the
licensing category are entirely, or almost entirely, concerned with the licensing
of weather modifiers. The "other" category would include States like Hawaii
which discuss weather modification in some manner but have neither a com-
prehensive statute nor one concerning licensing. States for which no provisions
concerning weather modification were found contain a notation of "no provisions"
on the chart. The exact text of those provisions follows the chart.
It should be noted that in most cases the State codes were current through
the 1976 sessions, however, in some cases the most current material available
was from the 1975 sessions.
Types of weather modification statutes
States Comprehensive Licensing Other
Alabama No provisions
Alaska No provisions..
Arizona Arizona Rev. Stat. §§45-
2401—45-2405.
Arkansas. No provisions
California. California Water Code §§ 400-
415; § 235. California Gov-
ernment Code § 53063. Cal-
ifornia Pub. Res. Code
§ 5093.36.
Colorado Colorado Rev. Stat. §§ 36-20-
101—36-20-126.
Connecticut Connecticut Gen. Stat, Ann*
§ 24-5-24-8.
Delaware. No provisions
Florida Florida Stat. Ann. §§ 403.281-
403.411.
Georgia No provisions
Hawaii Hawaii Rev. Stat. §174-5(8).
Idaho Idaho Code §§ 22-3201-22-
3202; 22-4301-22-4302.
Illinois Illinois Ann. Stat. ch. 146 3/4,
§§ 1-32.
Indiana No provisions
Iowa Iowa Code Ann. §§361.1-
361.7.
Kansas Kansas Stat. §§ 19 212f; 82a-
1401-82a-1425.
Kentucky No provisions..
Louisiana Louisiana Rev. Stat. Ann.
§§ 2201-2208.
Maine... No provisions.
Maryland No provisions
Massachusetts No provisions
Michigan No provisions.
Minnesota Minnesota Stat. Ann. 42.01- . ... .
42.14.
Mississippi No provisions..
Missouri No provisions
Montana... Montana Rev. Codes Ann.
§§ 89 310—89 331.
Nebraska Nevada Rev. Stat. §§ 2 2401—
2 2449; 81 829.45.
1 This search w.-is completed In May ii>77.
(514)
515
Types of weather modification statutes
States Comprehensive Licensing Other
Nevada Nevada Rev. Stat. §§ 544.010-
544.240; 244.190.
New Hampshire - New Hampshire Rev. Stat.
Ann. § 432:1.
New Jersey No provisions
New Mexico New Mexico Stat. Ann. §§ 75- .
37-1-75-31-15.
New York. New York Gen. Mun. Law
§ 119-p.
North Carolina No provisions .
North Dakota. North Dakota Cent. Code
§§ 2-07-01-2-07-13; 37-
17.1-15; 58-03-07.
Ohio. No provisions..
Oklahoma Oklahoma Stat. Ann., title 2,
§§ 1401-1432.
Oregon Oregon Rev. Stat. §§ 558 010-
558.990; 451.010; 451.420.
Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Stat. Ann , title
3, §§ 1101-1118.
Rhode Island No provisions
South Carolina No provisions..
South Dakota. South Dakota Compiled Laws
Ann. §§ 38-9-1—38-9-22;
1-40-8; 10-12-18.
Tennessee No provisions _
Texas Texas Water Code, title 2,
§§14.001-14.112; Texas
Civil Code, title 120A.
§ 6889-7(16).
Utah Utah Code Ann. §§73-15-3—
73-15-8.
Vermont No provisions
Virginia No provisions
Washington Washington Rev. Code Ann
§§ 43.37.010-43.37.200; 43.
27A.080(6); 43.27A.180(1).
West Virginia West Virginia Code §§ 29 2B-
1-29-2B-15.
Wisconsin... Wisconsin Stat. Ann. § 195.40.
Wyoming Wyoming Stat. §§ 10-4—10-6,
§§ 9-267-9-276.
Arizona
Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 45-2401-45-2405
§ 45-2401. License required
No person or corporation, other than the United States and its administrative
agencies or the state shall, without having first received a license from the
Arizona water commission, conduct any weather control or cloud modification
operations or attempt artificially to produce rainfall. As amended Laws 1971,
Ch. 49, § 25.
§ 45-2402. Application for license
Any individual or corporation who proposes to operate weather control or cloud
modification projects or attempts to artificially induce rainfall shall, before
engaging in any such operation, make application to the Arizona water commis-
sion for a license to engage in the particular weather control or cloud modification
operation contemplated. As amended Laws 1971, Ch. 49, § 26.
Effective April 13, 1971.
§ 45-2403. Application fee; statement accompanying application
At the time of applying for the license, the applicant shall pay to the Arizona
water commission a fee of one hundred dollars, and shall file an application in
the form prescribed by the Arizona water commission and furnish a statement
showing :
1. The name and address of the applicant.
2. The names of the operating personnel, and if unincorporated all individuals
connected with the organization, or if a corporation the names of each of the
officers and directors thereof, together with the address of each.
516
3. The scientific qualifications of all operating or supervising personnel.
4. A statement of all other contracts completed or in process of completion at
the time the application is made, giving the names and addresses of the persons
to whom the services were furnished and the areas in which such operations have
been or are being conducted.
5. Methods of operation the licensee will use and the description of the aircraft,
ground and meteorological services to be utilized.
6. Names of the contracting parties within the state, including :
(a) The area to be served.
(b) The months in which operations will be conducted.
(c) The dates when evaluations will be submitted. As amended Laws 1071.
Ch. 49, § 27.
§ 45-2404- Reports required from licensees; failure to file; revocation of license
Each licensee shall within ninety days after conclusion of any weather control
or cloud modification project, file with the Arizona water commission a final
evaluation of the project. Each six months during the operation of any project
which has not been completed, each licensee shall file a report evaluating the
operations for the preceding six months in the project. Failure to file such reports
constitutes grounds for immediate revocation of the license. As amended Laws
1071, Ch. 49, § 28.
§ 45-2405. Equipment license; fee; application; reports required; revocation of
license
A. Any individual or corporation engaging in manufacturing, selling or offering
for sale, leasing or offering to lease, licensing or offering to license equipment and
supplies designed for weather control or cloud modification shall, before engaging
in such manufacture, sale or offering for sale, procure a license from the Arizona
water commission. The license shall be issued upon payment of a license fee of
ten dollars and the filing of an application which shall show :
1. The name and address of the applicant.
2. The full description of the type and design of the equipment and sup-
plies manufactured and sold by the applicant.
3. The operating technique of the equipment or supplies.
B. Within sixty days after issuance of an equipment license and semi-annually
thereafter, the licensee shall file with the commission a copy of all advertising
material used in selling or offering for sale, leasing or offering for lease, licensing
or offering for license the equipment and supplies manufactured or sold by it.
C. The holder of a license shall within ten days after each sale of equipment or
supplies report to the commission, in writing, the exact character and quantity
of equipment or supplies sold, the date of the sale and the persons to whom the
sale was made.
D. Failure to file a copy of advertising material or reports required in this
section constitutes grounds for immediate revocation of the equipment license)
A s a mended Laws 1071, Ch. 49, § 29.
Effective April 13, 1971.
California
Cal. Water Code §§ 400-415; 235
Regulation of Rain-Making and Rain-Prevention
Sec.
400. Legislative finding.
401. Department ; person.
402. License : necessity.
403. License ; application : fee.
404. License : contents of application.
40."). License ; issuance : duration;
400. License : renewal ; fee.
407. Notice of intention.
405. Notice of intention ; contents.
409. Notice of intention : publication.
410. Notice of intention ; proof of publication.
411. Record of operations.
412. Evaluation statement.
413. Emergency nucleation project ; fire fighting.
413.5 Proutrbt emergency.
414. License : revocation or suspension ; procedure.
415. Violation ; offense.
517
Chapter 4 teas added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 903, § 1.
§ 400. Legislative finding
The public interest, health, safety, welfare, and necessity require that scientific
experimentation in the field of artificial nucleation, and that scientific efforts to
develop, increase, and regulate natural precipitation be encouraged, and that
means be provided for the regulation and control of interference by artificial
means with natural precipitation of rain, snow, moisture, or water in any form
contained in the atmosphere, within the State, in order to develop, conserve, and
protect the natural water resources of the State and to safeguard life and
property.
(Added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 903, § 1.)
§ J/01. Department ; person
As used in this chapter :
(a) "Department" means the Department of Water Resources.
(b) "Person" means any person, firm, association, organization, partner-
ship, company, corporation, private or public, county, city, city and county,
district, or other public agency.
(Added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 903, § 1. Amended by Stats. 1959, c. 1269, p. 3415,
§2.)
§ 1/02. License ; necessity
No person, without first securing a license from the department, shall cause or
attempt to cause condensation or precipitation of rain, snow, moisture, or water
in any form contained in the atmosphere, or shall prevent or attempt to prevent
by artificial means the natural condensation or precipitation of rain, snow, mois-
ture, or water in any form contained in the atmosphere.
(Added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 903, § 1.)
§ 403. License; application; fee
Any person desiring to do any of the acts specified in Section 102 may file with
the department an application in writing for a license. Each application shall be
accompanied by a filing fee fixed by the department with the approval of the
Department of General Services but not to exceed fifty dollars ($50) and shall be
on a form to be supplied for such purpose by the department.
(Added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 904, § 1. Amended by Stats. 1965, c. 371, p. 1599,
§292.)
§ 404> License; contents of application
Every application shall set forth all of the following :
(a) The name and post-office address of the applicant.
(b) The previous education, experience, and qualifications of the appli-
cant, or, if the applicant is other than an individual, the previous education,
experience, and qualifications of the persons who will be in control of and
charged with the operations of the applicant.
(c) A general description of the operation which the applicant intends to
conduct and the method and type of equipment that the applicant proposes to
use.
(d) Such other pertinent information as the department may require.
(Added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 904, § 1. )
§ 405. License; issuance; duration
Upon the filing of the application upon a form supplied by the department and
containing the informatio prescribed by this chapter and accompanied by the
required filing fee the department shall issue a license to the applicant entitling
the applicant to conduct the operations described in the application for the calen-
dar year for which the license is issued, unless the license is sooner revoked or
suspended.
(Added by Stats.1953, c. 139, p. 904, § 1.)
Derivation : Stats. 1951, c. 1677, p. 3868, § 6.
§ 406. License; renewal; fee
A license may be renewed annually upon application to the department, accom-
panied by a renewal fee fixed by the department with the approval of the Depart-
518
ment of General Services but not to exceed twenty-five dollars ($25), on or before
the last' day of January of the calendar year for which the license is renewed.
(Added by Stats.1953, c 139, p. 904, § 1. Amended by Stats.1965, c. 371, p. 1399,
§293.)
Derivation : Stats.1951, c. 1677, p. 3868, § 6.
§ '{07. Xotice of intention
Prior to undertaking any operation authorized by the license the licensee shall
tile with the department and cause to be published a notice of intention. The
licensee shall then confine his activities for that operation substantially within
the rime and area limits set forth in the notice of intention,
i Added by Stats.1953, c. 139, p. 904, § 1.)
Derivation : Stats.1951, c. 1677, p. 3868, § 7.
§ .'fOS. Xotice of intention; contents
The notice of intention shall set forth all of the following :
(a) The name and address of the licensee.
(b) The nature and object of the intended operation and the person or
persons on whose behalf it is to be conducted.
(c) The area in which and the approximate time during which the opera-
tion will be conducted.
(d) The area which will be affected by the operation as near as the same
may be determined in advance.
(Added by Stats.1953, c. 139, p. 904, § 1.)
Derivation : Stats.1951, c. 1677, p. 3868, § 8.
§ 409. Xotice of intention; publication
The licensee shall cause the notice of intention to be published pursuant to
Section 6063 of the Government Code in a newspaper having a general circula-
tion and published within any county wherein the operation is to be conducted
and in which the affected area is located, or, if the operation is to be conducted
in more than one county or if the affected area is located in more than one county
or is located in a county other than the one in which the operation is to be con-
ducted, then such notice shall be published in like manner in a newspaper having
a general circulation and published within each of such counties. In case there is
no newspaper published within the appropriate county, publication shall be made
in a newspaper having a general circulation within the county.
(Stats.1953, c. 139, p. 904, § 1. Amended by Stats.1955, c. 482, p. 953, § 1; Stats.
1957, c. 448, p. 1302, § 1.)
§ 410. Xotice of intention; proof of publication
Proof of publication shall be filed by the licensee with the department within
15 days from the date of the last publication of the notice. Proof of publication
shall be by copy of the notice as published attached to and made a part of the
affidavit of the publisher or foreman of the newspaper publishing the notice.
(Added by Stats.1953. c. 139, p. 905, § 1.)
Derivation : Stats.1951, c. 1677, p. 3868, § 10.
S ///. Record of operations
Every licensee shall keep and maintain a record of all operations conducted
by him pursuant to his license showing the method employed, the type of equip-
ment used, the times and places of operation of the equipment, the name and post-
office address of each person participating or assisting in the operation other than
the licensee, and such other information as may be required by the department,
and shall report the same to the department immediately upon the completion of
each operation.
(Added by Stats.1953, c. 139, p. 905, § 1.)
Derivation : Stats.1951, c. 1677, p. 3869, § 11.
§ 'i12. Evaluation statement
Each licensee shall further prepare and maintain an evaluation statement for
each operation which shall include a report as to estimated precipitation, defining
the gain or loss occurring from nucleation activities, together with supporting
data therefor. This statement, together with such other pertinent information as
519
the department may require, shall be sent to the department upon request by the
department.
(Added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 905, § 1.)
Derivation : Stat. 1951, c. 1677, p. 3869, § 11.
§ 413. Emergency nucleation project; fire fighting
Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter to the contrary, the department
may grant a licensee permission to undertake an emergency nucleation project,
without compliance by the licensee with the provisions of Sections 407 to 410, in-
clusive, if the same appeal's to the department to be necessary or desirable in aid
of extinguishment of fires.
(Added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 905, §1.)
Derivation : Stats, 1951, c. 1677, p. 3869, § 12.
§ 'flS.o Drought emergency
Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter to the contrary, upon request of
the board of supervisors of a county or of the governing body of a city or a pub-
lic district of the State, and upon the submission of such supporting evidence
as the department may require, the department may grant a licensee permission
to undertake a nucleation project for the purpose of alleviating a drought emer-
gency, without prior compliance by the licensee with the provisions of Section 407
requiring publication of notice of intention, if such project appears to the depart-
ment to be necessary or desirable. Nothing contained in this section shall be con-
strued as to relieve the licensee in such case from compliance with the provisions
of Sections 407 to 410, inclusive, requiring publication of notice of intention and
tiling of proof of such publication, as soon after the granting of permission by the
department as is practicable.
(Added by Stats. 1955, c. 1399, p. 2512, §1.)
§ 'fl'/. License; revocation or suspension; procedure
Any license may be revoked or suspended if the department finds, after due
notice to the licensee and a hearing thereon, that the licensee has failed or re-
fused to comply with any of the provisions of this chapter. The proceedings herein
referred to shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Admin-
istrative Procedure Act, Chapter 5, Part 1, Division 3, Title 2 of the Government
Code and the department shall have all the powers granted therein.
(Added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 905, §1.)
Derivation : Stats. 1951, c. 1677, p. 3869, § 13.
§ Violation; offense
Any person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misde-
meanor.
(Added by Stats. 1953, c. 139, p. 905, § 1.)
Derivation : Stats. 1951, c. 1677, p. 3869, § 14.
§ 285. Weather modification; artificial rainfall; research contracts
The department, either independently or in co-operation with any person or any
county, state, federal, or other agency, to the extent that funds are allocated
therefor, may conduct a program of study, research, experimentation, and evalu-
ation in the field of weather modification, including the production and control
of rainfall by artificial means, and it may contract with public and private or-
ganizations and persons for research relative thereto.
(Added by Stats. 1959, c. 2115, p. 4932, §1.)
Cal. Gov't Code § 53063
§ 5806. Rainfall control
Any county, city, city and county, district, authority or other public corpora-
tion or agency which has the power to produce, conserve, control or supply water
for beneficial purposes shall have the power to engage in practices designed to
produce, induce, increase or control rainfall or other precipitation for the gen-
eral benefit of the territory within it. (Formerly §53062, added Stats. 1955, c.
1823. p. 3365, § 1. Renumbered § 53063. and amended Stats. 1957, c. 65, p. 634, § 4. )
Library references: Waters and Water Courses 121; C.J.S. Waters § 124;
Waters and Water Courses, 180, 183 (1, 2), 190, 198, 202; C.J.S. Waters
§ 228.
520
Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 5093.36
§ 5093.86 Management and preservation of wilderness areas
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, each state agency with juris-
diction over any area designated as a wilderness area shall be responsible for pre-
serving the wilderness character of the wilderness area and shall so administer
such area for such other purposes for which it may have been established as also
to preserve its wilderness character. Except as otherwise provided in this chap-
ter, wilderness areas shall be devoted to the public purposes of recreational,
scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use.
(b) Except as specifically provided * * * in this chapter, and subject to pri-
vate rights existing as of January 1, 1975, there shall be no commercial enter-
prise and no permanent road within any wilderness area and, except as neces-
sary in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the wilder-
ness area, there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized
equipment, or motorboats, no landing or hovering aircraft, no flying of aircraft
lower than * * * 2,000 feet above the ground, no other form of mechanical trans-
port, and no structure or installation within any wilderness area.
(c) The following special provisions are hereby made :
(1) Within wilderness areas, such measures may be taken as may be
necessary for the control of fire, insects, and diseases, subject to such condi-
tions as the state agency or agencies having jurisdiction over such wilder-
ness areas may deem desirable.
(2) Nothing in this chapter shall prevent any activity by any public
agency within a wilderness area, including prospecting, for the purpose of
gathering information about mineral or other resources, which the state
agency or agencies having jurisdiction over such wilderness area have de-
termined will be carried on in a manner compatible with the preservation
of the wilderness environment.
(3) The state agency or agencies having jurisdiction over wilderness areas
may authorize the collection of hydrometeorological data and the conduct of
weather modification activities, including both atmospheric and surface ac-
tivities and environmental research, which are within, over, or may affect
wilderness areas and for such purposes may permit access, installation, and
use of equipment which is specifically justified and unobtrusively located.
Maximum practical application of miniaturization, telemetry, and camou-
flage shall be employed in conducting weather modification activities. In
granting permission for the conduct of data collection and weather modi-
fication activities, the appropriate state agency may prescribe such operat-
ing and monitoring conditions as it deems necessary to minimize or avoid
long-term and intensive local impact on the wilderness character of the
wilderness areas affected.
(4) Within wilderness areas, the grazing of livestock, where established
prior to January 1. 1975. may be permitted to be continued by the present
lessee or permittee subject to * * * limitation * * * by such terms and
regulations as are deemed necessary by the state agency or agencies having
jurisdiction over such wilderness areas.
(5) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to the aerial stocking of
fish or to the conduct of aerial surveys of wildlife species.
(Added by Stats. 1974, c. 1196, p. ?58t §2. Amended by Stats. 1975, c. 26,
p. , § 1 ; Stats. 1976, c. 592, p. , § 1.)
Colorado
Colo. Rev. Stat. §36-20-101-36-20-126
Weather Modification
ARTICLE 20
\Y( <itit< r MadificQtion
Editor's NOTE.— r-The substantive provisions of this article, formerly article 1 of
Chapter 151. C.K.S. 1963. were repealed and reeuaeted in 1972. causing some addi-
tion, reloctaion, and elimination of sections as well as subject matter. (Compare
historical record prior to 1972 of article 1 of chapter 151, C.R.S. 1963, as amended
through L. 71.)
521
3G-20-101. Short title.
30-20-102. Legislative declaration.
36-20-103. Declaration of rights.
36-20-104. Definitions.
36-20-105. Administration.
36-20-106. Advisory committee — appointment — duties.
36-20-107. Duties of the director.
36-20-108. Powers of the director.
36-20-109. License and permit required — exemptions.
36— 20— 110. Issuance of license.
36-20-111. License fee — expiration.
36-20-112. Permit required — when issued.
36-20-113. Permit fee.
36-20-114. Limits of permit.
36-20-115. Modification of permit.
36-20-116. Scope of activity.
36-20-117. Reports of licensee.
36-20-118. Operations affecting weather in other states.
36-20-119. Suspension — revocation — refusal to renew.
36-20-120. Operation under permit.
36-20-121. Hearing required.
36-20-122. Immunity of state or public employees.
36-20-123. Legal recourse — liability — damages.
36-20-124. License or permit as defense in actions.
36-20-125. Judicial review.
36-20-126. Penalty.
36-20-101. Short title. — This article shall be known and may be cited as the
'•Weather Modifietaion Act of 1972".
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 632, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-1.
36-20-102. Legislative declaration. — The general assembly declares that the
state of Colorado recognizes that economic benefits can be derived for the people
or the state from weather modification. Operations, research, experimentation,
and development in the field of weather modification shall therefore be encour-
aged. In order to minimize possible adverse effects, weather modification activi-
ties shall be carried on with proper safeguards, and accurate information con-
cerning such activities shall be made available for purposes of regulation. While
recognizing the value of research and development of weather modification tech-
niques by governmental agencies, the general assembly finds and declares that
the actual practice of weather modification, whether at public or private expense,
is properly a commercial activity which the law should encourage to be carried
out, whenever practicable, by private enterprise.
Source : R&RE, L. 72. p. 032, § 1 : C.R.S. 1963. § 151-1-2.
36-20-103. Declarator, of right*. — The general assembly declares that the state
of Colorado claims the right to all moisture suspended in the atmosphere which
falls or is artificially induced to fall within its borders. Said moisture is declared
to !>e the property of the people of this state, dedicated to their use pursuant
to sections 5 and 6 of article XVI of the Colorado constitution and as otherwise
provided by law. It is further declared that the state of Colorado also claims
the prior right to increase or permit the increase of precipitation by artificial
means for use in Colorado. The state of Colorado also claims the right to modify
weather as it affects the people of the state of Colorado and to permit such
modification by activitv within Colorado.
Source : R & RE, L, 72, p. 632, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-3.
36-20-104. Definitions. — As used in this article, unless the context otherwise
requires :
(1» "Advisory committee" or "committee" means the advisory committee ap-
pointed pursuant to this article.
(2) "Director" means the executive director of the department of natural
resources, as created by article 33 of title 24. C.R.S. 1973.
(3) "License" means a certification issued by the director indicating that a
specific person has met the standards for certification as a weather modifier
and is approved to direct weather modification operations in the state.
(4> "Operation" means the performance in Colorado of any activity to attempt
to modify or having the effect of modifying natural weather conditions other
than usual and customary activities not conducted primarily for weather modi-
fication and having only a minor effect on natural weather conditions.
I a i "Permit" means a certification of project approval to conduct a specific
weather modification operation within the state under the conditions and
within the limitations required and established under the provisions of this
article.
<6j "Person" means an individual, partnership, or public or private corpora-
tion or agency, except where the context indicates that "person" is used in the
sense of a living individual.
522
(7) "Publication" or "publish" means a minimum of at least two consecutive
weekly legal notices in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the
county or counties, or portions theerof, included within the proposed operation.
It shall not be necessary that notice be made on the same day of the week in
each of the two weeks, but not less than one week shall intervene between the
tirst publication and the last publication, and notice shall be complete on the
date of the last publication. If there is no such newspaper, notice shall be by
posting in at least three public places within the county, or portions thereof,
included within a proposed operation. Publication of notices provided for in
this article may be made, at the discretion of the director, by notices broadcast
over any or all standard radio, FM radio, television stations, and cable television.
Such broadcast notices shall make reference to locations or publications wherein
details of the subject matter of the notices are located.
(8) "Research and development" means theoretical analysis, exploration,
experimentation, and the extension of investigative findings and theories of a
scientific or techncial nature into practical application for experimentation
and demonstration purposes, including the experimental production and testing
of models, devices, equipment, materials, and processes both in the laboratory and
in the atmosphere.
(9) "Research and development operation" or "research and development
project" means an operation which is conducted solely to advance scientific and
technical knowledge in weather modification. Research and development opera-
tions may be conducted by state or federal agencies, state institutions of higher
education, and bona fide nonprofit research corporations, or by commercial
operators under contracts with such entities solely for research purposes.
(10) "Weather modification" means any program, operation, or experiment
intended to induce changes in the composition, behavior, or dynamics of the
atmosphere by artificial means.
36-20-^105. Administration. — (1) The executive director of the department of
natural resources is hereby charged with administration of this article.
(2) The director shall issue all licenses and permits provided for in this
article. He is hereby empowered to issue rules and regulations he finds neces-
sary to facilitate the implementation of this article, and he is authorized to
execute and administer all other provisions of this article pursuant to the powers
and limitations contained in this article.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 634, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963. § lol-l-5.
36-20-106. Advisory committee — appointment — duties. — (1) (a) The governor
shall appoint an advisory committee to assist the director in developing licens-
ing standards and report forms, in conducting studies, in establishing minimum
operation requirements, and to advise the director on such other technical and
general matters as the director may request. The director may designate sub-
committees from the advisory committee to assist him in carrying out the pur-
poses of this paragraph (a).
(b) The advisory committee shall be composed of ten persons chosen by the
governor, five of whom shall have appropriate scientific, technical, industrial,
and water resources background and who may reside anywhere within the state:
and live of whom shall be farmers or ranchers who derive the major portion of
their income from agricultural enterprises located within Colorado: One farmer
or rancher shall reside in and be chosen from each of the following river basins in
( Colorado :
(I) One person representing the Gunnison. White, Tampa, and Colorado
river basins ;
(Hi One person representing the San Juan river basin :
(III) One person representing the Rio Grande river basin :
(IV) ( toe person representing the Arkansas river basin : and
(V) One person representing the Republican, South Platte, and North
Platte river basins.
(c) At the tirst meeting of the committee subsequent to the passage of this
section, the ten appointed members of the committee shall draw lots to deter-
mine which four shall hold office for a period of three years, which three shall
li<»ld office for a period of two years, and which three shall hold office for a period
of one year. Thereafter, appointed members to the committee shall hold office
for a period of three years. Any six members of the committee shall constitute a
quorum.
(2) (.a) When any person shall file a verified complaint alleging damages' as a
result of an operation or that an operation is being conducted in violation of the
requirements of a permit or in violation of this article, the director shall either
convene the advisory committee, which shall investigate the complaint and shall
conduct a hearing or he may appoint a hearing officer pursuant to section
30-20-108 ( 3 )( h ) . Thereafter a decision shall be issued in accordance with
article 4 of title 24. C.R.S. 1973. Such decision shall not include any determination
as to the amount of damages, if any.
(b) The record of the hearing, including all evidence, exhibits, and other
papers presented or considered, together with all findings of fact and conclu-
sions of law, shall be available to any part in interest for use in any action
for judicial review or a trial for damages, subject to applicable rules of evidence.
(3) Members of the advisory committee shall not be paid for their services
but they may be reimbursed for any actual and necessary expenses they incur in
the perf ormance of their duties.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 634, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-6.
36-20-107. Duties of the director. — (1) The director shall establish rules
and regulations, in accordance with article (4) of title 24, C.R.S. 1973, necessary
to effectuate the purposes of this article and shall consult with the advisory com-
mittee with respect thereto.
(2) (a) The director shall establish qualifications, procedures, and condi-
tions for the issuance of licenses for the purpose of conducting weather modifi-
cation activities within the state. Such qualifications, procedures, and conditions
shall be developed in consultation with the advisory committee appointed
pursuant to section 36-20-106.
(b) The qualifications so established shall insure that the licensee demonstrates
knowledge, skill, and experience reasonably necessary to accomplish weather
modification without actionable injury to person or property, but the licensee
shall be limited to the exercise of such license to the method of weather modifi-
cation within his area of expertise. At a minimum each such application shall
meet requirements at least as stringent as one or more of the following:
(I) Demonstrates that he has at least eight years' experience at the pro-
fessional level in weather modification field research or operations, at least
three of those year as a project director ; or
(II) Has obtained a baccalaureate degree in engineering, mathematics,
or the physical sciences plus three years' experience in weather modification
. held research or operations ; or
(III) Has obtained a baccalaureate degree in meteorology, or a degree
in engineering or the physical sciences which includes, or is an addition to,
the equivalent of at least twenty-five semester hours of meteorological
course work and two years' practical experience in weather modification
operations or research.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 635, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-7 ; L. 73. p. 1535, § 2.
36-20-108. Powers of the director. — (1) The director may issue permits
applicable to specific weather modification operations. For each operation,
said permit shall describe the specific geographic area authorized to be affected
and shall provide a specific time period during wrhich the operation may con-
tinue, which period may be discontinuous but may not have a total duration
exceeding one calendar year from the day of its issuance. A separate permit
shall be required for each operation. The director shall issue a permit only
after it is established that the project is conceived to provide economic benefits
or that it will advance or enhance scientific knowledge. The director shall issue
only one active permit for activities in any geographic area if two or more
projects therein might adversely interfere with each other. The director shall
ask the advisory committee to review each request for a permit and offer him its
advice on issuance.
(2) The director shall, by regulation or order, establish standards instruc-
tions to govern the carrying out of research and development or commercial
operations in weather modification that he considers necessary or desirable
to minimize danger to land, health, safety, people, property, or the
environment.
(3) (a) The director may make any studies or investigations, obtain any
information, and hold any hearings he considers necessary or proper to assist
him in exercising his power or administering or enforcing this article or any
regulations or orders issued under this article.
(b) All hearings conducted under this article shall be conducted pursuant
to the provisions of this article and article 4 of title 24. C.R.S. 1973, and the
524
director may by his own action, or at the request of the advisory committee,
appoint a hearing officer to conduct any hearing required by this article :
said hearing to be conducted under the provisions and within the limitations
of article 4 of title 24, C.R.S. 1073. and this article.
(4) (a) The director may. upon approval of the governor, represent the
state in matters pertaining to plans, procedures, or negotiations for interstate
compacts relating to weather modification, but, before any such compacts
may be implemented, the consent of the general assembly must be obtained.
(b) The director may represent the state, and assist counties, municipal-
ities, and public agencies in contracting with commercial operators for the
performance of weather modification or cloud seeding operations. Counties,
municipalities, and other public agencies of this state are hereby granted the
authority to contribute to and participate in weather modification.
(5) In order to assist in expanding the theoretical and practical knowledge
of weather modification the director may participate in and promote continu-
ous research and development in :
(a) The theory and development of weather modification, including
processes, materials, ecological effects, and devices related to such matters;
(b) The utilization of weather modification for agricultural, industrial,
commercial, municipal, recreational, and other purposes ;
(c) The protection of life and property and the environment during
research and operational activities.
(6) The director may conduct and may contract for research and
development activities relating to the purposes of this article.
i 7 ) The director, subject to limits of the department of natural resources'
appropriation, may hire any technical or scientific experts or any staff deemed
necessary to carry out the provisions of this article.
(8) Subject to any limitations imposed by law, the department of natural
resources, acting through the director, may accept federal grants, private
gifts, and donations from any other source. Unless the use of the money is
restricted, or subject to any limitations provided by law, the director may :
(a ) Spend it for the administration of this article :
(b) By grant, contract, or cooperative arrangement, use the money to
encourage research and development by a public or private agency ; or
(c) Use the money to contract for weather modification operations.
(0) The director, in cooperation with the advisory committee, shall pre-
scribe those measurements reasonably necessary to be made prior to and
during all operations to determine the probable effects of an operation.
Source : R & RE L. 72, p. 636. § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-8.
36-20-100. License and permit required — exemptions. — (1) Xo person may
engage in activities for weather modification and control without a weather
modification license and a weather modification permit issued by the director:
nor may any person engage in any activities in violation of any term or condi-
tion of the license or the permit.
( 2 ) The director, to the extent he considers exemptions practical, may
provide by regulation for exempting the following activities from the fee re-
quirements of this article :
(a) Research, development, and experiments conducted by state and fed-
eral agencies, state institutions of higher education, and bona fide nonprofit
research organizations ;
(1)) Laboratory research and experiments: and
(c) Activities of an emergency nature for protection against fire, frostj
hail, sleet. smog, fog, or drought.
Sen rce : R & RE, L. 72. p. 637, § 1 : C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-10.
36-20-110. Issuance r,f license.— CI ) The director, in accordance with appli-
cable regulations, shall issue a weather modification license to each applicant
who :
(a) Pays the license fee. if applicable : and
(b) Meets the qualifications for licensure established by the director
pursuant to section 3C>-20--107 (2).
Source: R & UK. L. 7L>. p. 837, §1: C.R.S. 1063. §151-1-10.
36-^20-111. r.icensc frr expiration.— \ license shall be issued under this'
article only upon the payment to the state of Colorado the sum of one hun-
dred dollars for such licence. Each such license shall expire at the end of
the calendar year in which it is Issued.
Source: R & RE. L. 72. p. 638, S 1 ; C.R.S. 1063. § 151-1-li.
525
36-20-112. Permit required — when issued. — (1) The director, in accordance
with his regulations, shall issue a weather modification permit to each appli-
cant who :
(a) Holds, or if the applicant is a corporation, the corporation demon-
strates that the person in control of the project holds, a valid weather
modification license.
(b) Pays the permit fee, if applicable.
(c) Furnishes proof of financial responsibility adequate to meet obli-
gations reasonably likely to be attached to or result from the proposed
weather modification operation. Such proof of financial responsibility may,
but at the discretion of the director shall not be required to, be shown by
presentation of proof of a prepaid insurance policy with an insurance
company licensed to do business in Colorado, which insurance policy shall
insure liabilities in an amount set by the director and provide a cancellation
clause with a thirty-day notice to the director, or by filing with the director
an individual, schedule, blanket, or other corporate surety bond in an
amount approved by the director.
(d) Submits a complete operational plan for each proposed project
prepared by the licensed operator in control which includes a specific
statement of objectives, a map of the proposed operating area which
specifies the primary target area and shows the area reasonably expected
to be affected, the name and address of the licensee, the nature and object
of the intended operation, the person or organization on whose behalf it
is to be conducted, a statement showing any expected effect upon the
environment and methods of determining and evaluating the same, and
such other detailed information as may be required to describe the opera-
tion and its proposed method of evaluation. This operational plan shall be
placed on file with the director and with any other agent as he may
required.
(e) Publishes a notice of intent to modify weather in the counties to be
affected by the weather modification program before the licensee secures a
permit and before beginning operations. The published notice shall designate
the primary target area and indicate the general area which might be
affected. It shall also indicate the expected duration and intended effect and
state that complete details are available on request from the licensee or the
director or from the other agent specified by the director. The publication
shall also specify a time and place, not more than one week following the
completion of publication, for a hearing on the proposed project. Proof of
publication shall be furnished to the director by the licensee.
(f ) Receives approval under the criteria set forth in subsection (3) of this
section.
(2) Before a permit may be issued, the director or his authorized agents
shall hold a public hearing on the proposed project. Said hearing shall be
held in a place within a reasonable proximity of the area expected to be
affected by the proposed operation.
(3) No permit may be issued unless the director determines, based on the
information provided in the operational plan and on the testimony provided
at the public hearing :
(a) That, if it is a commercial project, the proposed weather modification
operation is conceived to provide, and offers promise of providing, an eco-
nomic benefit to the area in which the operation will be conducted :
(b) That the project is reasonably expected to benefit the people in said
area or benefit the people of the state of Colorado :
(c) That the project is, if it is a commercial project, scientifically and
technically feasible ;
(d) That the project is, if it is a scientific or research project, designed
for and offers promise of expanding the knowledge and the technology of
weather modification :
(e) That the project does not involve a high degree of risk of substantial
harm to land, people, health, safety, property, or the environment :
(f) That the project is designed to include adequate safeguards to pre-
vent substantial damage to land, water rights, people, health, safety, or to
the environment ;
(g) That the project will not adversely affect another project: and
34-857 — 79 36
526
(h) That the project is designed to minimize risk and maximize scientific
gains or economic benefits to the residents of the area or the state.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 638, § 1 : C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-12.
36-20-113. Permit fee. — The fee for each permit or the renewal thereof
under section 36-20-114 shall be at a minimum of one hundred dollars. If the
operation is a commercial project an additional amount equal to two percent
of the value of the contract for such commercial project shall be required
and paid before a permit may be issued. Said fees are intended to provide
at least a portion of the moneys necessary to administer this article.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 639, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963. § 151-1-13.
36-20-114. Limits of permit. — (1) A separate permit is required annually
for each operation. If an operation is to be conducted under contract, a
permit is required for each separate contract. Subject to the provisions of
subsection (2) of this section, a permit may be granted for more than one
year's duration.
(2) The director may conditionally approve a project for a continuous time
period in excess of one year's duration. Permits for such operations must
be renewed annually. In approving the renewal of a permit for a continuous
program, the director may waive the procedures for initial issuance of a
permit in section 36-20-112 and, upon his review and approval of the project's
operational record, or, if at his request, the advisory committee reviews and
subsequently approves the project's operational record, he may issue a re-
newed permit for the operation to continue. In such instances, the fees, based
upon the value of the contract pursuant to section 26-20-113 may be prorated
and paid on an annual basis.
(3) A project permit may be granted by the director without prior publi-
cation of notice by the licensee in case of fire, frost, hail, sleet, smog, fog,
drought, or other emergency. In such cases, publication of notice shall be
performed as soon as possible and shall not be subject to the time limits
specified in this article 4 of title 24, C.R.S. 1973.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 639, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-14.
36-20-115. Modification of permit. — (1) The director may revise the terms
and conditions of a permit if :
(a) The licensee is first given notice and a reasonable opportunity for a
hearing on the need for a revision ; and
(b) It appears to the director that a revision is necessary to protect the
health or property of any person or to protect the environment.
(2) If it appears to the director that an emergency situation exists or is
impending which could endanger life, property, or the environment, he may,
without prior notice or a hearing, immediately modify the conditions of a permit,
or order temporary suspension of the permit on his own order. The issuance of
such order shall include notice of a hearing to be held within ten days thereafter
on the question of permanently modifying conditions or continuing the suspension
of the permit. Failure to comply with an order temporarily suspending an
operation or modifying the conditions of a permit shall be grounds for imme-
diate revocation of the permit and the operator's license.
(3) It shall be the responsibility of the licensee conducting any operation
to notify the director of any emergency which can reasonably be foreseen or
of any existing emergency situations in subsection (2) of this section which
might in any way be caused or affected by the weather modification operation.
Failure by the licensee to so notify the director of any such existing emergency,
or any impending emergency which should have been foreseen, may be grounds,
at the discretion of the director, for revocation of the license and revocation of
the permit for operation.
Source : R & RE. L. 72, p. 640, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-15.
36-20-116. Scope of activity. — Once a permit is issued, the licensee shall con-
fine his activities within the limits of time and area specified in the permit,
except to the extent that the limits are modified by the director. He shall also
comply with any terms and conditions of the permit as originally issued or as
subsequently modified by the direetor.
Source : R & RE. L. 72, p. 640, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963. § 151-1-16.
36-20-117. Reports of licensee. — (1) In order to aid in research and develop-
ment in weather modification and to aid in the protection of life and property
or the environment, any person conducting any weather modification operation
in Colorado or elsew here where by undertaking operations within Colorado shall
527
file such reports at such time and in the manner and form as shall be required
by regulation of the director.
(2) Report forms may be developed by the director on the advice of the
advisory committee and shall include basic records showing: The method
employed, the type of equipment used, the kind and amount of each material used,
the times and places the equipment is operated, the name and address of each
individual, other than the licensee, who participates or assists in the operation,
any environmental effects realized or suspected to have occurred, and any other
necessary data he may require.
(3) The director shall require written biweekly reports summarizing the proj-
ect's activities and intended results while the project is actually in operation,
and he shall require a written final operational report and a written final report
evaluating the project, or an annual operational report and an annual project
evaluation, as the case may be. A final operational report along with a prelimi-
nary scientific evaluation of the project shall be filed no later than thirty days
after the completion of the project. A final complete scientific evaluation of the
project shall be filed no later than one hundred eighty days after the completion
of the project. An annual summary report shall be filed sixty days prior to the
renewal of a permit under the provisions of section 36-20-114(2). All such
reports are declared to be public records subject to the provisions and limitations
of part 2 of article 72 of title 24, C.R.S. 1973.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 640, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963. § 151-1-17 ; L. 73, p. 1536. § 3.
36-20-118. Operations affecting weather in other states. — Weather control
operations may not be carried on in Colorado for the purpose of affecting weather
in any other state if that state prohibits such operations to be carried on in
that state for the benefit of Colorado or its inhabitants.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 641, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-18.
36-20-119. Suspension — revocation — refusal to renew. — (1) The director may
suspend or revoke a license or permit if it appears that the licensee no longer has
the qualifications necessary for the issuance of an original license or permit
or has violated any provision of this article.
(2) The director may refuse to renew the license of, or to issue another
permit to, any applicant who has failed to comply with any provision of this
article.
•Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 641 ; § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-19.
36-20-120. Operation under permit. Operations under permit may only be
carried forward by or under the immediate direction and supervision of a
licensee.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 641 ; § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-20.
36-20-21. Hearing required. — (1) Except as provided in section 36-20-115, the
director may not suspend or revoke a license or permit without first giving the
licensee notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard with respect to the
grounds for his proposed action.
(2) Said hearing shall be conducted by the advisory committee in the manner
provided in section 36-20-106(2) or in the same manner bv a hearing officer.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 641 ; § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963. § 151-1-21.
36-20-22. Immunity of state or public employees. — Officers or employees of
the state or any agency thereof, or officers or employees of any county or
municipality or other public agency of the state, are immune from liability
resulting from any weather modification operations approved or conducted by
them under the provisions and limitations of this article.
Source : R & RE, L. 72. p. 641 : § 1 : C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-22.
36-20-123. Legal recourse — liability — damages. — (1) The mere dissemination
of materials and substances into the atmosphere pursuant to an authorized
project shall not give rise to the contention or concept that such use of the
atmosphere constitutes trespass or involves an actionable or enjoinable public
or private nuisance.
(2) (a) Failure to obtain a license or permit before conducting an opera-
tion, or any actions which knowingly constitute a violation of the conditions
of a permit, shall constitute negligence per se.
(b) The director may order any person who is found to be conducting a
weather modification operation without a license and permit to cease and
desist from said operation. Failure to obey said order shall constitute a mis-
demeanor and is punishable as provided in section 36-20-126.
Source: R & RE, L 72, p. 641, § 1; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-23.
528
36-20-124. License or permit as defense in actions. — The fact that a person
holds a license or was issued a permit under this article, or that he has com-
plied with the requirements established by the director pursuant to this article,
is not admissible as a defense in actions for damages or injunctive relief
brought against him.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 642, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-24.
36-20-125. Judicial review. — Judicial review of any action of the director
or findings of the advisory committee may be had in accordance with the
provisions of section 24-^-106, C.R.S. 1973.
Source : R & RE, L. 72, p. 642, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963, § 151-1-25.
36-20-126. Penalty. — Any person conducting a weather modification opera-
tion without first having procured a required license and permit, or who
makes a false statement in the application for a license or permit, or who
fails to file any report as required by this article, or who conducts any weather
modification operation after revocation of a license or denial, revocation,
modification, or temporary suspension of a permit for operation, or who violates
any other provisions of this article is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon
conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than five thousand
dollars, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than six months,
or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each such violation shall be a separate
offense.
Source : R & RL, L. 72, p. 642, § 1 ; C.R.S. 1963. § 351-1-26.
Connecticut
Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. §§ 24-5-24-8
Weather Control Board
Sec.
24-5. Weather Control board.
24-6. Duties.
24-7. Advisory committees, standards, representation of state in interstate matters.
24-8. Receipt of funds.
§ 2-'i-5. Weather control board
There shall be a weather control board, consisting of the commissioner of
agriculture, the commissioner of environmental protection or his designated
representative, the dean of the college of agriculture of The University of
Connecticut, the director of the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station
and a meteorologist, whose education and experience qualify him for profes-
sional membership in the American Meteorological Society and who shall be
appointed by the governor for a term of six years. The members of the board
shall serve without compensation but shall be reimbursed for then necessary
expenses. The commissioner of agriculture shall be chairman of the board and
shall furnish such supplies, materials and clerical assistance as the duties of
the board may require. The board shall meet on call of the chairman at the
offices of the department of agriculture.
(1959, P.A. 668, §1; 1961, P.A. 16; 1971, P. A. 872, §206, eff. Oct. 1, 1971.)
§ 24-6. Duties
The board may conduct, and promote the conduct of, research and develop-
ment activities relating to :
(1) The theory and development of methods of weather modification
and control, including processes, materials and devices related thereto ;
(2) the utilization of weather modification and control for agricultural,
industrial, commercial and other purposes, and
(3) the protection of life and property during research and operational
activities.
(1959, P.A. 668, §2.)
§ 2-{-7. Advisory committees, standards, representation of state in interstate
matters
In the performance of its functions the board may:
(1) Establish advisory committees to advise with and make recommenda-
tions to the board concerning legislation, policies, administration, research
and other matters ;
529
(2) establish standards and instructions to govern research in weather
modification and control, and
(3) represent the state in all matters pertaining to plans, procedures
or negotiations for interstate compacts relating to weather modification
and control.
(1959, P. A. 668. §3.)
§ 24-8. Receipt of funds
The board may. subject to any limitations otherwise imposed by law, receive
and accept on behalf of the state any funds which may be offered or which
may become available from federal grants or appropriations, private gifts,
donations or bequests or any other source and may expend such funds, unless
their use is restricted or subject to any limitations otherwise provided by law,
for the administration of this chapter and for the encouragement of research
and development by a state, public or private agency by direct grant, by contract
or by cooperative means.
(959, P. A. 668, §4.)
Florida
Fla. Stat. Ann. §§403.281-403.411
403.281 Definitions ; weather modification law
As used in this chapter relating to weather modification :
(1) "Department'' is the Deartment of [Environmental Regulation] \
(2) "Person" includes any public or private corporation.
403.291 Purpose of weather modification law
The purpose of this law is to promote the public safety and welfare by
providing for the licensing, regulation and control of interference by artificial
means with tbe natural precipitation of rain, snow, hail, moisture or water
in any form contained in the atmosphere.
403.301 Artificial weather modification operation ; license required
Xo person without securing a license from the department, shall cause or
attempt to cause by artificial means condensation or precipitation of rain,
snow, hail, moisture or water in any form contained in the atmosphere, or
shall prevent or attempt to prevent by artificial means the natural condensa-
tion or precipitation of rain, snow, hail, moisture or water in any form con-
tained in the atmosphere.
403.311 Application for licensing; fee
(1) Any person desiring to do or perform any of the acts specified in § 403.301
may file with the department an application for a license on a form to be
supplied by the department for such purpose setting forth all of the following:
(a) The name and post office address of the applicant.
(b) The education, experience and qualifications of the applicant, or
if the applicant is not an individual, the education, experience and qualifica-
tions of the persons who will be in control and in charge of the operation
of the applicant.
(c) The name and post office address of the person on whose behalf the
weather modification operation is to be conducted if other than the
applicant.
(d) The nature and object of the weather modification operation which
the applicant proposes to conduct, including a general description of
such operation.
(e) The method and type of equipment and the type and composition
of materials that the applicant proposes to use.
(f) Such other pertinent information as the department may require.
(2) Each application shall be accompanied by a filing fee in the sum of
one hundred dollars and proof of financial responsibility as required by
§ 403.321.
403.321 Proof of financial responsibility
(1) Xo license shall be issued to any person until he has filed with the
department proof of ability to respond in damages for liability on account of
1 Bracketed words substituted by the division of statutory revision for tbe words "Pollu-
tion Control." See Laws 1975. e. 75-22. § 8.
Republished to conform to Fla. St. 1975.
530
accidents arising out of the weather modification operations to be conducted
by him in the amount of ten thousand dollars because of bodily injury to or
death of one person resulting from any one incident, and subject to said limit
for one person, in the amount of one hundred thousand dollars because of
bodily injury to or death of two or more persons resulting from any one inci-
dent, and in the amount of one hundred thousand dollars because of injury to
or destruction of property of others resulting from any one incident.
(2) Proof of financial responsibility may be given by filing with the depart-
ment a certificate of insurance or a bond in the required amount.
403.331 Issuance of license; suspension or revocation; renewal
( 1 ) The department shall issue a license to each applicant who :
(a) By education, skill and experience appears to be qualified to under-
take the weather modification operation proposed in his application.
(b) File proof of his financial responsibility as required by §403.321.
(c) Pays filing fee required in § 403.311.
(2) Each such license shall entitle the licensee to conduct the operation
described in the application for the calendar year for which the license is
issued unless the license is sooner revoked or suspended. The conducting of any
weather modification operation or the use of any equipment or materials other
than those described in the application shall be cause for revocation or sus-
pension of the license.
(3) The license may be renewed annually by payment of a filing fee in the
sum of fifty dollars.
403.341 Filing and publication of notice of intention to operate; limitation on
area and time
Prior to undertaking any operation authorized by the license, the licensee shall
file with the department and cause to be published a notice of intention. The
licensee shall then confine his activities substantially within the time and area
limits set forth in the notice of intention.
403.351 Contents of notice of intention
The notice of intention shall set forth all of the following :
( 1 ) The name and post office address of the licensee.
(2) The name and post office of the persons on whose behalf the weather
modification operation is to be conducted if other than the licensee.
(3) The nature and object of the weather modification operation which
licensee proposes to conduct, including a general description of such operation.
(4) The method and type of equipment and the type and composition of the
materials the licensee proposes to use.
(5) The area in which and the approximate time during which the operation
will be conducted.
,(G) The area which will be affected by the operation as nearly as the same
may be determined in advance.
403.361 Publication of notice of intention
The licensee shall cause the notice of intention to be published at least once
a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper having general circulation
and published within any county wherein the operation is to be conducted and
in which the affected area is located, or if the operation is to be conducted in
more than one county or if the affected area is located in more than one county
or is located in a county other than the one in which the operation is to be con-
ducted, then such notice shall be published in like manner in a newspaper hav-
ing a general circulation and published within each of such counties. In case
there is no newspaper published within the appropriate county, publication shall
be made in a newspaper having a general circulation within the county.
.) 03.. ill Proof of publ ica t i on
Proof of publication shall be filed by the licensee with the department
fifteen days from the date of the last publication of notice. Proof of publication
shall be by copy of the notice as published, attached to and made a part of the
affidavit of the publisher or foreman of the newspaper publishing the notice.
403.38 1 I \' <■<■(,)■ d and reports of operations
1 1 ) Each licensee shall keep and maintain a record of all operations conducted
by him pursuant to his license showing the method employed, the type and
composition of materials used, the times and places of operation, the name and
531
post office address of each person participating or assisting- in the operation
other than licensee and such other information as may be required by the
department and shall report the same to the department at such times as it
may require.
(2) The records of the department and the reports of all licensees shall
be available for public examination.
403.391 Emergency licenses
Notwithstanding any provisions of this act to the contrary, the department
may grant a license permitting a weather modification operation without
compliance by the licensee with the provisions of §§ 403.351-403.371, and without
publication of notice of intention as required by § 403.341 if the operation
appears to the department to be necessary or desirable in aid of the extinguish-
ment of fire, dispersal of fog or other emergency.
403.401 Suspension or revocation of license; appeal
(1) Any license may be revoked or suspended if the department finds, after
due notice to the licensee and a hearing therein, that the licensee has failed
or refused to comply with any of the provisions of this act.
(2) Any licensee may apply to the circuit court for the county of Leon to
review any order of the department within the time provided by the Florida
appellate rules. The review shall be by certiorari in the manner prescribed by
the Florida appellate rules.
(3) Either the department or the licensee may appeal from the order or
decree of the circuit court to the appropriate district court of appeal in the
same manner appeals may be taken in suits in equity.
403.411 Penalty
Any person conducting a weather modification operation without first having
produced a license, or who shall make a false statement in his application for
license, or who shall fail to file any report or reports as required by this act,
or who shall conduct any weather modification operation after revocation or
suspension of his license, or who shall violate any other provision of this act,
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided
in § 775.082 or § 775.083 ; and if a corporation, shall be guilty of a misde-
meanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in § 775.083. Each such
violation shall be a separate offense.
Hawaii
Haw. Rev. Stat. § 174-5(8)
§ 114-5 Powers
In addition to all the powers granted to the board of land and natural resources
in chapter 171 for the purpose of carrying out all of its functions and duties,
the board shall have the following powers for the purposes of this chapter :
(8) To investigate and make surveys of water resources, including the
possibility and feasibility of inducing rain by artificial or other means ;
Idaho
Idaho Code §§22-3201-23-3202; 22-4301-22-4302
Rainfall — Artificial Production
Sec.
22-3201. Registration of producers of artificial rainfall.
22-3202. Log of activities filed with department of agriculture.
22-3201. Registration of producers of artificial rainfall. — Any person, persons,
association, firm, or corporation conducting or intending to conduct within the
state of Idaho operations to assist artificially in production of or to produce
artificially rainfall shall register with the department of agriculture of the
state of Idaho.
Such registration shall require the filing of the name of the person, asso-
ciation, or corporation, its residence, or principal place of business in the
state of Idaho and the general nature of the business to be conducted. [1957, ch.
106, § 1, p. 184.]
22-3202. Log of activities filed with department of agriculture. — Such person,
persons, association, firm or corporation shall thereafter file with the said
532
department of agriculture a log of all its activities in the production, artificially,
within this state, of rainfall. [1957, ch. 106, § 2, p. 184.]
Chapter 43 — Weather Modification Districts
Sec.
2-4301 . Establishment — Petition — Election.
22-4302. Weather modification fund — Creation — Administration.
22-4301. Establishment — Petition — Election. — (1) The county commissioners
of any county shall, upon petition signed by not less than fifty (50) resident real
property holders of said county, or any portion thereof, which may exclude
incorporated cities, undertake the following procedure to determine the advis-
ability of resolving to establish and maintain a weather modification district
within the county as may be designated in the petition.
(a) A petition to form a weather modification district shall be presented
to the county clerk and recorder. The petition shall be signed by not less
than fifty (50) of the resident real property holders within the proposed
district.
(b) The petition shall be filed with the county clerk and recorder of the
county in which the signers of the petition are located. Upon the filing of the
petition the county clerk shall examine the petition and certify whether the
required number of petitioners have signed the petition. If the number of
petition signers is sufficient, the clerk shall transmit the petition to the
board or county commissioners.
(c) Upon receipt of a duly certified petition the board of county com-
missioners shall give notice of an election to be held in such proposed district
for the purpose of determining whether or not the proposed district shall
be organized and to elect the first board of trustees for the district. Such
notice shall include the date and hours of the election, the polling places, the
maximum number of mills which the proposed district will be permitted
to levy, the general purposes of the proposed district, a description of
lands to be included in the proposed district, a statement that a map of
the proposed district is available in the office of the board of county com-
missioners, and the names and terms of the members to he elected to the
first board of trustees. The notice shall be published once each week for three
(3) consecutive weeks prior to such election, in a newspaper of general cir-
culation within the county.
(d) The election shall be held and conducted as nearly as may he in the
same manner as general elections in this state, except that electors need not
be registered in order to vote in such election. The board of county com-
missioners shall appoint three (3) judges of election, one (1) of whom shall
act as cleark for the election. Each elector may be required to take an oath
that he is a resident of the proposed district, and otherwise possesses all the
qualifications of an elector before casting his vote. At such election the
electors shall vote for or against the organization of the district, and the
members of the fisrt board of trustees.
(e) The judges of election shall certify the returns of the election to the
board of county commissioners. If a majority of the votes cast at said
election are in favor of the organization, the board of county commissioners
shall declare the district organized and give it a name by which, in all
proceedings, it shall thereafter be known, and shall further designate the
first board of trustees elected, and thereupon the district shall be a legal
taxing district.
(f) On the second Tuesday of January, in the second calendar year after
the organization of any district, and on the second Tuesday of January
every year thereafter an election shall be held, which shall be known as
the annual election of the district.
Al tlx1 first annual election in any district hereafter organized, and each
third year thereafter, there shall be elected by the qualified electors of the
district, one (1) member of the board to serve for a term of three (3) years : at
the second annual election and each third year thereafter, there shall be elected
one I 1 ) member of the board to serve for a term of three (3) years, and at the
third annual election, and each third year thereafter, there shall be elected one
(1) member of the board to serve for a term of three (3) years.
Not later than thirty (30) days before any such election, nominations may
be filed with the secretary of the board and if a nominee does not withdraw his
533
name before the first publication of the notice of election, his name shall be
placed on the ballot. The board shall provide for holding such election and
shall appoint judges to conduct it. The secretary of the district shall give notice
of election by publication, and shall arrange such other details in connection
therewith as the board may direct. The returns of the election shall be certified to
and shall be canvassed and declared by the board. The candidate or candidates
receiving the most votes shall be eleced. [1975, ch. 145, § 1, p. 334.]
22-4302. Weather modification fund — Creation — Administration. — The board
of trustees of a weather modification district shall conduct the affairs of the
district. The board of trustees shall certify a budget to the board of county
commissioners to fund the operations of the district. The budget preparation,
hearings and approval shall be the same as required for any county budget.
The certification of the budget to the board of county commissioners shall be
as required for other taxing districts. The board of county commissioners may
levy annually upon all taxable property in the weather modification district, a
tax not to exceed four (4) mills, to be collected and paid into the county
treasury and apportioned to a fund to be designated the "weather modification"
fund, which is hereby created. Such fund shall be used by the district for the
gathering of information upon, aiding in or conducting programs for weather
control or modification, and such activities related to weather modification
programs as are necessary to insure the full benefit of such programs. Moneys in
the fund may be paid out only on order of the board of trustees. [1975, ch. 145,
§2, p. 334.]
Illinois
111. Ann. Stat. ch. 146 §§ 1-32
Chapter 146%
weather [new]
Sec.
1. Short title.
2. Declaration of purpose.
3. Definitions.
3.01 Department.
3.02 Director.
3.03 Board.
3.04 Weather modification.
3.05 Person.
3.06 Operation.
3.07 Research and Development.
3.08 License.
3.09 Licensee.
3.10 Permit.
3.11 Permittee.
4. Administration.
5. Weather Modification Board.
6. Regulations.
7. Investigations.
8. Hearings.
9. Interstate compacts.
10. License and permit required.
11. Exemptions.
12. Issuance of license.
13. License fee.
14. Expiration date.
15. Renewal of license.
16. Suspension, revocation, refusal to renew a license.
17. Issuance of permit.
18. Permit fee.
19. Scope of permit.
20. Proof of financial responsibility.
21. Modification of permit.
22. Renewal of permit.
23. Suspension, revocation, refusal to renew permit.
24. Recreation of license or permit.
25. Review under Administrative Review Act — Venue — Costs.
26. Records and reports.
27. State immunity.
28. Liability.
29. Penalty for violations.
30. Suits to recover fines, penalties or fees.
31. Injunction to restrain violations.
32. Partial invalidity.
534
WEATHER MODIFICATION CONTROL ACT
The Weather Modification Control Act was enacted as Article I
of P.A. 78-674 ; Article II consisted of amendments of related acts.
§i. Short title
This Act shall be known and may be cited as the "Weather Modification
Control Act". (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 1, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
TITLE OF ACT
An Act to regulate weather modification in this State and amending certain
Acts therein named in connection therewith. Approved by P.A. 78-674, eff.
Oct. 1, 1973.
§ 2. Declaration of purpose
(a) The General Assembly hereby declares that weather modification affects
the public health, safety and welfare and the environment, and is subject to
regulation and control in the public interest. Properly conducted weather
modification operations can improve water quality and quantity, reduce losses
from weather hazards and provide economic benefits for the people of the
State. Therefore weather modification operations and research and develop-
ment shall be encouraged. In order to minimize possible adverse effects, weather
modification activities shall be carried on with proper safeguards, and accurate
information concerning such activities shall be recorded and reported to the
Department of Registration and Education.
(b) This Act shall be liberally construed to carry out these objectives and
purposes. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, §2, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 3. Definitions
As used in this Act unless the context otherwise requires, the terms specified
in Sections 3.01 through 3.11 have the meanings ascribed to them in those
Sections. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, §3, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 3.01. Department
"Department" means the Department of Registration and Education. (P.A.
78-674, Art. I, §3.01, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 3.02 Director
"Director" means the Director of Registration and Education. (P.A. 78-674,
Art. I §3.02, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 3.03 Board
"Board" means the Weather Modification Board appointed pursuant to
this Act. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 3.03, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 3.04 Weather modification
"Weather modification" means any activity performed with the intention
of producing artificial changes in the composition, motions and resulting
behavior of the atmosphere. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, §3.04, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 3.05 Person
"Person" means any individual, corporation, company, association, firm,
partnership, society, joint stock company, any State or local government or
any agency thereof, or any other organization, whether commercial or non-
profit, who is performing weather modification operations or research and
development, except where acting solely as an employee, agent or independent
contractor of the United States of America or any agency thereof. "Person"
does not include the United States of America or any agency thereof. (P.A. 78-
674, Art. 1, §3.05, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§3.06 Operation
"Operation" means the performance of any weather modification activity
undertaken for the purpose of producing or attempting to produce any form of
modifying effect upon the weather within a specified geographical area over a
specified time interval. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, §3.06, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
%3.07 Research and Development
"Research and Development" means exploration, filed experimentation and
extension of investigative findings and theories of a scientific or technical
535
nature into practical application for experimental and demonstration purposes,
including the experimental production and testing of models, devices, equip-
ment, materials and processes. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, §3.07, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 3.08 License
"License" means a professional license issued by the Director indicating
that a specified person has met the standards for certification as a weather
modifier and is approved to conduct weather modification operations for which
permits have been issued under this Act. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 3.08, eff. Oct. 1,
1973.)
§ 3.09 Licensee
"Licensee" means a person who holds a professional weather modification
license issued under this Act. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 3.09, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 3.10 Permit
"Permit" means an operational permit issued by the Director indicating
that approval has been given for conducting a specified weather modification
operation within the State subject to the conditions and within the limitations
established under the provisions of this Act. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 3.10, eff.
Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 3.11 Permittee
"Permittee" means a person who holds an operational permit issued under
this Act. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 3.11, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 4- Administration
(a) The powers and duties enumerated in this Act shall be exercised by
the Director.
(b) The Director shall exercise the powers and duties enumerated in this
Act, except those enumerated in Section 5, only upon the recommendation
and report in writing of the majority of the members of the Board (P.A.
78-674, Art. I, § 4, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 5. Weather Modification Board
There is created the Weather Modification Board to be composed of 5 resi-
dents of the State who shall be appointed by the Director. In selecting members
of the Board the Director shall include individuals with qualifications and
practical experience in agriculture, law, meteorology and water resources.
The Director shall appoint one member of the Board to a term of one year,
2 members to terms of 2 years and 2 members to terms of 3 years, commencing
January 1, 1974. After expiration of the terms of the members first appointed
pursuant to this Act, each of their respective successors shall hold office for
a term of 3 years and until their successors are appointed and qualified. Mem-
bers of the Board shall be eligible for re-appointment.
In the event a member of the Board shall be disqualified from considering
business before the Board because of a conflict of interest, the Director may
appoint a resident of the State to serve temporarily on the Board. After the
Board decides upon its recommendation to the Director concerning such business
the member will resume his position on the Board.
The chairman of the Board shall be designated by the Director from among
the members.
Each member of the Board shall be paid the sum of $25 for every day he
is actually engaged in its services, and shall be reimbursed for such actual and
necessary expenses as he may incur in performance of the functions of the
Board.
The Board shall hold an annual meeting at Springfield, Illinois, and such
other meetings at such times and places and upon such notice as the Board
may determine. Three members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for
performance of its function. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 5, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 6. Regulations
The Department shall make reasonable rules and regulations necessary to the
exercise of its powers and the performance of its duties under this Act.
In order to effectuate the objectives and purposes of this Act, the Department
shall make reasonable rules and regulations establishing qualifications, proce-
dures and conditions for issuance, renewal, revocation, suspension, refusal to
renew, refusal to issue, restoration and modification of licenses and permits.
536
In order to minimize possible adverse effects to the public health, safety and
welfare ' and the environment, the Department shall make reasonable rules
and regulations establishing standards and instructions to govern weather mod-
ification operations and research and development.
In order to make accurate information available concerning weather modifica-
tion operations and research and development in the State, the Department
shall make reasonable rules and regulations requiring record keeping and
reporting and shall establish procedures and forms for such record keeping and
reporting. (P. A. 78-674, Art. I, § 6, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 7. Investigation*
The Department shall have the power to investigate the weather modification
operations and research and development of any person holding or claiming
to hold a license or a permit issued under this Act.
Duly authorized agents of the Department shall have the power to enter and
inspect any place in which there is reasonable belief that weather modification
operations or research and development is taking place, in which weather
modfication operations or research and development is in fact taking place and
the premises of any person holding a permit issued under this Act. (P. A. 78-674,
Art. I, § 7, eff. Oct. 1, 1973. )
§ 8. Hearings
Except for emergency modifications of operational permits as provided for in
Section 21(b) of this Act, before suspending, revoking, refusing to renew or
modifying a license or a permit, the Department shall issue a citation notifying
the licensee or permittee of the time and place when and where a hearing of the
matter shall be had. Such citation shall contain a statement of the reasons for
the proposed action. Such citation shall be served on the licensee or permittee
at least 10 days prior to the date therein set for the hearing, either by delivery
of the citation personally to the licensee or permittee or by mailing it by regis-
tered mail to his last known place of business.
The Department shall hear the matter at the time and place fixed in such
citation unless the licensee or permittee waives his right to a hearing. Both the
Department and the licensee or permittee shall be accorded ample opportunity
to present, in person or by counsel, such statements, testimony, evidence and
argument as may be pertinent to the matter.
The Department may continue such hearing from time to time. If the Depart-
ment shall not be sitting at the time and place fixed in the citation or at the
time and place to which a hearing shall have been continued, the Department
shall continue such hearing for a period not to exceed 30 days.
Any circuit court or any judge thereof, upon the application of the licensee
or permittee or of the Department, may by order duly entered, require the
attendance of witnesses and the production of relevant books, records, docu-
ments and instruments before the Department in any hearing relative to refusal
to renew, suspension, revocation or modification of a license or a permit, and
the court or judge may compel obedience to its or his order by proceedings for
contempt.
In conducting any hearing, the Department or a representative designated
by it may administer oaths and examine witnesses.
The Department, at its expense, shall provide a stenographer to record the
testimony and preserve a record of all proceedings at the hearing of any case
wherein a license or permit is revoked, suspended, not renewed or modified. The
notice of hearing and all other documents in the nature of pleadings and written
motions filed in the proceedings, the transcript of testimonv, the report of the
Board and the orders of the Department constitute the record of such pro-
ceedings. (P.A. 78-674, Art, §8, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 9. Interstate compacts
The Department may represent the State in matters pertaining to plans,
procedures or negotiations for interstate compacts related to weather modifica-
ion. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, §9, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 10. License and permit required
Except as provided in Section 11 of this Act, no person may engage in weather
modification activities :
(a) Without both a professional weather modification license issued under
Section 12 of this Act and a weather modification operational permit issued
under Section 18 of this Act ; or
537
(b) In violation of any term, condition or limitation of such license or permit
(P. A. 78-674, Art. I, §10, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 11. Exemptions
(a) The Department may provide by rules and regulations for exemption
of the following activities from the license and permit requirements of this
Act:
(1) Research and development conducted by the State, its subdivisions
and agencies of the State and of its subdivisions, institutions of higher
learning and bona fide research corporations ;
(2) Activities for protection against fire, frost or fog; and
(3) Activities normally conducted for purposes other than inducing,
increasing, decreasing or preventing hail, precipitation, or tornadoes.
(b) Exempted activities shall be so conducted as not to interfere with
weather modification operations conducted under a permit issued in accord-
ance with this Act. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 11, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 12. Issuance of license
(a) The Department shall provide by rules and regulations the procedure and
criteria for issuance of licenses. Criteria established by rules and regulations
shall be consistent with the qualifications recognized by national or international
professional and scientific associations concerned with weather modification
and meteorology, and shall be designed to carry out the objectives and pur-
poses of this Act.
(b) The Department, in accordance with its rules and regulations, shall issue
a weather modification license to each applicant who :
(1) Pays the license fee established by Section 13 of this Act ; and
(2) Demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the Department, competence
necessary to engage in weather modification operations.
(c) If an applicant for a license does not pay the license fee established by
Section 13 of this Act or does not demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the
Department, competence necessary to engage in weather modification operations,
the Department shall deny the application for the license. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I,
§ 12. Eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§73. License fee
The fee for an original license is $100. The fee for a renewal license is $20.
(P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 13, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ Ut. Expiration date
Each original or renewal license shall expire on October 31 of each vear,
<P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 14, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 15. Renewal of license
At the expiration of the license period, the Department shall issue a renewal
license to each applicant who pays the renewal license fee established by Section
13 of this Act, and who has the qualifications then necessary for issuance of an
original license. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 15, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 16. Suspension, revocation, refusal to renew a license
The Department may suspend, revoke or refuse to renew a license for any
one or combination of the following causes :
( a ) Incompetency ;
( b ) Dishonest practice ;
(c) False or fraudulent representation in obtaining a license or permit
under this Act ;
(d) Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this Act or any of
the rules and regulations of the Department made under this Act ; and
(e) Aiding other persons to fail to comply with any of the provisions of
this Act or any of the rules and regulations of the Department made under
this Act.
(P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 16, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 77. Issuance of permit
(a) The Department shall provide by rules and regulations the procedure and
criteria for issuance of permits. Criteria established by rules and regulations
shall be designed to carry out the objectives and purposes of this Act,
538
(b) A. person applying for a weather modification operational permit shall file
with the Department an application which shall contain such information as the
Department by rules and regulations may require and which in addition shall:
(1 ) List the name and address of the applicant ;
(2) List the name and address of the person on whose behalf the opera-
tion is to be conducted ;
(3) Indicate that the applicant holds, or if the applicant is an organiza-
tion rather than an individual, demonstrates that the individual in control
of the project holds a valid professional weather modification license issued
under Section 12 of this Act ;
(4) Furnish proof of financial responsibility in accordance with Section
20 of this Act ; and
(5) Set forth a complete operational plan for the project which includes a
specific statement of its nature and object, a map of the proposed operating
area which specifies the primary target area and shows the area reasonably
expected to be affected, a statement of the approximate time during which
the operation is to be conduced, a list of the materials and methods to be
used in conducting the operation, an emergency shut down procedure which
states conditions under which operations must be suspended because of
possible danger to the public health, safety and welfare or to the environ-
ment, and such other detailed information as may be required to describe the
operation.
(c) The Department may give public notice by newspaper, radio or television
announcement in the area of the State reasonably expected to be affected by
operations conducted under a permit that it is considering an application for
a permit, and may hold a public hearing for the purpose of obtaining information
from the public concerning the effects of issuing or refusing to issue the permit.
(d) The Department may issue the operational permit if it determines that :
(1) The applicant holds, or if the applicant is an organization rather
than an individual, demonstrates that the individual in control of the
project holds a valid professional weather modification license issued under
section 12 of this Act ;
(2) The applicant has furnished proof of financial responsibility in
accordance with Section 20 of this Act ;
(3) The project is reasonably conceived to improve water quality or
quantity, reduce losses from weather hazards, provide economic benefits
for the people of the State, advance or enhance scientific knowledge or
otherwise carry out the objectives and purposes of this Act ;
(4) The project is designed to include adequate safeguards to minimize
possible damage to the public health, safety or welfare or to the environment ;
(5) The project will not adversely affect another operation for which a
permit has been issued ;
(6) The applicant has complied with the permit fee requirement estab-
lished by Section 18 of this Act ; and
(7) The applicant has complied with and the project conforms to such
other criteria for issuance of permits as have been established by rules
and regulations of the Department made under this Act.
(e) In order to carry out the objectives and purposes of this Act, the Depart-
ment may condition and limit permits as to primary target area, time of the
operation, materials and methods to be used in conducting the operation, emer-
gency shut down procedure and such other operational requirements as may be
established by the Department.
( f ) A separate permit shall be required for each operation.
(g) The Department shall issue only one permit at a time for operations in
any geographic area if 2 or more operations conducted within the conditions
and limits of the permits might adversely interfere with each other. (P.A. 78-674,
Art. I, § 17, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 18. Permit fee
(a) The fee for each permit or renewal thereof shall be a minimum of $100.
0>) If the operation will be conducted under contract and the value of the
contract is more than $10,000, the fee for the permit or renewal thereof shall
be equivalent to one per cent of the value of the contract.
(c) II" the operation will not be conducted under contract and the estimated
costs of the operation are more than $10,000, the fee for the permit or renewal
thereof shall be equivalent to one per cent of the estimated costs of the opera-
539
tion The costs of the operation shall be estimated by the Department from
information given to it by the applicant for the permit or renewal thereof
and such other information as may be available to the Department.
(d) The permit fee is due and payable to the Department prior to issuance
of the permit or renewal thereof. (P. A. 78-674, Art. I, § 18, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
% 19. Scope of permit
(a) A separate permit is required for each operation. When an operation
is conducted under contract, a permit is required for each separate contract.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this Section, each permit or
renewal permit shall expire one year from the date of its issuance.
(c) The Department may conditionally approve a project for a continuous
time period in excess of one year's duration. Permits for such operations
must be renewed annually. In approving the renewal of a permit for a con-
tinuous program, the Department shall review and approve the permittee's
operational record, and then may issue a renewal of the permit for the opera-
tion to continue. m , .
(d) The permittee shall confine his activities within the limits specified m
the permit, except to the extent that the limits are modified by the Depart-
ment. The permittee shall comply with any conditions of the permit as orig-
inally issued or as subsequently modified by the Department. (P. A. 78-674,
Art. I, § 19, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
% 20. Proof of financial responsibility
Proof of financial responsibility is made by showing to the satisfaction of
the Department that the permittee has the ability to respond in damages to
liability which might reasonably result from the operation for which the per-
mit is sought. Such proof of financial responsibility may, but shall not be re-
quired to, be shown by :
(a) Presentation to the Department of proof of a prepaid noncancellable
insurance policy against such liabilities in an amount set by the Department;
or
(b) Filing with the Department a corporate surety bond, cash or negotiable
securities in an amount approved by the Department. (P. A. 78-674, Art. I,
§20, eff. Oct. i, 1973.)
§ 21. Modification of permit
(a) The Department may revise the conditions and limits of a permit if:
(1) The permittee is given notice and a reasonable opportunity for a
hearing on the need for a revision in accordance with Section 8 of this
Act ; and
(2) It appears to the Department that a modification of the conditions
and limits of a permit is necessary to protect the public health, safety
and welfare or the environment.
(b) If it appears to the Department that an emergency situation exists or
is impending which could endanger the public health, safety or welfare or
the environment, the Department may, without prior notice or a hearing,
immediately modify the conditions and limits of a permit, or order temporary
suspension of the permit. The issuance of such an order shall include notice
of a hearing to be held within 10 days thereafter on the question of perma-
nently modifying the conditions and limits or continuing the suspension of
the permit. Failure to comply with an order temporarily suspending an op-
eration or modifying the conditions and limits of a permit shall be grounds
for immediate revocation of the permit and of the license of the person con-
trolling the operation.
(c) It shall be the responsibility of the permittee to notify the Department
of any emergency which can reasonably be foreseen, or of any existing emer-
gency situations which might be caused or affected by the operation. Failure
by the permittee to so notify the Department of any such existing emergency,
or any impending emergency which should have been foreseen, may be grounds,
at the discretion of the Department, for revocation of the permit and of the
license of the person controlling the operation. (P. A. 78-674, Art. I, § 21, eff.
Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 22. Renewal of permit
At the expiration of the permit period, the Department shall issue a renewal
permit to each applicant who pays the permit fee and whose operational record
540
indicates that an original permit would be issuable for the operation. (P. A.
78-674, Art. I, § 22, eg. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 23. Suspension, revocation, refusal to renew permit
(a) The Department may suspend or revoke a permit if it appears that the
permittee no longer has the qualifications necessary for the issuance of an
original permit or has violated any provision of this Act or of any of the rules
and regulations issued under this Act.
(b) The Department may refuse to renew a permit if it appears from the
operational records and reports of the permittee that an original permit would
not be issuable for the operation, or if the permittee has violated any provi-
sion of this Act or of any of the rules and regulations issued under this Act.
i P. A. 7^674. Art. I. § 23, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 2Jf. Restoration of license or permit
(a) At any time after the suspension or revocation of a license or permit
the Department may restore it to the licensee or permittee upon a finding that
the requirements for issuance of an original license or permit have been met by
the licensee or permittee.
(b) At any time after the refusal to renew a license or permit the Depart-
ment may renew it upon a finding that the requirements for issuance of an
original license or permit have been met by the licensee or permittee. (P. A.
78-674, Art. I, §24, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 25. Review under Administrative Review Act — Venue — Costs
(a) All final administrative decisions of the Department are subject to
judicial review pursuant to the provisions of the "Administrative Review
Act", approved May 8, 1945, and all amendments and modifications thereof,
and the rules adopted pursuant thereto.1 The term "administrative decision''
is defined as in Section 1 of tht "Administrative Review Act".2
(b) Such proceedings for judicial review shall be commenced in the circuit
court of the county in which the party applying for review resides ; but if such
party is not a resident of this State, the venue shall be in Sangamon County.
(c) The Department shall not be required to certify any record to the circuit
court or file any answer in the circuit court or otherwise appear in any court
in a judicial review proceeding, unless there is filed in the court with the
complaint a receipt from the Department acknowledging payment of the costs
of furnishing and certifying the record. The costs shall be computed at the rate
of fifty cents per page. Failure on the part of the plaintiff to file such receipt in
court shall be grounds for dismissal of the action. (P. A. 78-674, Art. I, § 25,
eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 26. Records and reports
(a) In order to aid in research and development of weather modification
and to aid in the protection of the public health, safety and welfare and the
environment, any person conducting any weather modification in Illinois or
elsewhere by undertaking operations within Illinois, shall keep such records
and file such reports at such time or times and in the manner and form as
may be required by the rules and regulations made under this Act.
(b) Record and report forms may be developed by the Department showing
the method of weather modification employed in the operation, the type of
equipment used, the kind and amount of each material used, the times and
places the equipment was operated, the times when there was modifiable
weather but the permittee did not operate and the reasons therefor, the name
and address of each individual, other than the licensee, who participates or
assists in the operation, the manner in which operations do not conform to the
conditions and limits of the permit as established according to Section 17(e)
or as modified under Section 21, weather observations and records specified by
the Department and any other necessary data the Department may require
under its rules and regulations.
(c) The records and reports which are the custody of the Department
and which have been filed with it under this Act or under the rules and regula-
tions made under this Act shall be kept open for public examination as 'public
(!<"•', ments. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I. §26, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
rhapter no. § 204 ot spq.
« Chapter 110. § 204.
541
§ 27. State immunity
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to impose or accept any liability or
responsibility by the State, its agencies and the officers and employees thereof
for anv injury caused bv any persons who conduct weather modification opera-
tions. \p.A. 78-674, Art. I, §27, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 28. Liability
(a) An operation conducted under the license and permit requirements of
this Act is not an ultrahazardous or an abnormally dangerous activity which
makes the licensee or permittee subject to liability without fault.
(b) Dissemination of materials and substances into the atmosphere by a
permittee acting within the conditions and limits of his permit shall not give
rise to the contention that such use of the atmosphere constitutes trespass.
(c) Except as provided in subsections (a) and (b) of this Section, and in
Section 27 of this Act, nothing in this Act shall prevent any person adversely
affected by a weather modification operation from recovering damages resulting
from intentional harmful actions or negligent conduct by a permitee.
(d) Failure to obtain a license and permit before conducting an operation,
or operational activities which knowingly constitute a violation of the conditions
or limits of a permit, shall constitute negligence per se.
(e) The fact that a person holds a license or was issued a permit under this
Act, or that he has complied with the rules and regulations made by the
Department pursuant to this Act, is not admissible as a defense in any legal
action which may be brought against him. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, §28, eff. Oct. 1,
1973.)
§ 29. Penalty for violations
Any person violating any of the provisions of this Act or of any valid rule
or regulation issued under this Act is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor, and
each day such violation continues constitutes a separate offense. (P.A. 78-674.
Art. 1, § 29, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 30. tSuits to recover fines, penalties or fees
All suits for the recovery of any of the fines, penalties or fees prescribed
in this Act shall be prosecuted in the name of the ''People of the State of Illi-
nois", in any court having jurisdiction, and it shall be the duty of the State's
Attorney of the county where such offense is committed to prosecute all persons
violating the provisions of this Act upon proper complaint being made. All fines,
penalties and fees collected under the provisions of this Act shall inure to the
Department. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, § 30, eff. Oct. 1, 1973.)
§ 31. Injunction to restrain violations
The Department may, in its discretion, in addition to the remedy set forth
in the preceding Section, apply to a court having competent jurisdiction over
the parties and subject matter, for a writ of injunction to restrain repetitious
violations of the provisions of this Act. (P.A. 78-674, Art. I, §31, eff. Oct. 1,
1973. )
§ 32. Partial invalidity
If any portion of this Act is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect any
other part of this Act which can be given effect without the invalid portion.
( i '.A. 78-674. Art. I, § 32, eff. Oct. 1, 1973. )
Iowa
Iowa Code Ann. §§ 361.1-361.7
Chapter 361. Weather Modification [New]
Sec.
361.1 Definitions.
361.2 Modification board.
361.3 Program — contract.
361.4 Fund.
361.5 Election on question.
361.6 Budget request.
361.7 Cancellation of program.
Chapter 361, Code 1958, Township Licenses, consisting of sections
361.1 to 361.7, was repealed by Acts 1959 (58 G.A. ) ch. 254, § 9.
For provisions relating to county business licenses, see § 382.23 et seq.
34-S37 — 79 37
542
Provisions constituting chapter 361, Code 1973, Weather Modification,
consisting of sections 361.1 to 361.7, were added by Acts 1972 (64 G.A.)
ch. 1086, §§ lto7.
361.1 Definitions
As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires :
1. "Agricultural land" means any tract of land of ten acres or more used
for agricultural or horticultural purposes.
2. "Public agency" means public agency as defined in section 28E.2.
3. "Private agency" means private agency as defined in section 28E.2.
(Acts 1972 (64 G.A.) ch. 1086, § 1.)
361.2 3Iodification board
The county board of supervisors shall, upon receipt of a petition signed by
at least one hundred owners and tenants of agricultural land located in the
county, establish a weather modification board consisting of five members
appointed by the board of supervisors for three-year terms, except that two
members of the initial board shall be appointed for two-year terms. In the
case of a vacancy, the appointment shall be made for the unexpired term.
The members of the board shall organize annually by the election of a chairman
and vice-chairman. Meetings shall be held at the call of the chairman or at the
request of the majority of the members of the board. A majority vote of the
members of the board shall be required to determine any matter relating to
their duties. (Acts. 1972 (64 G.A.) ch. 1086, § 2.)
361.3 Program — contract
The weather modification board may :
L Investigate and study the feasibility of artificial weather modification
for the county.
2. Develop and administer an artificial weather modification program.
3. Contract with any public or private agency as provided in chapter 28E
to carry out an artificial weather modification program.
4. Request the county board of supervisors to conduct a referendum au-
thorizing the levy and collection of a tax, not to exceed two cents per acre
on agricultural land in the county, for the administration of an artificial
weather modification program.
5. Accept, receive, and administer grants, funds, or gifts from public or
private agencies to develop or administer an artificial weather modification
program. (Acts 1972 (64 G.A.) ch. 1086, § 3.)
3614 Fund
There is created in the office of county treasurer of each county having a
weather modification board a weather modification fund. Any taxes or other
funds received by the weather modification board shall be placed in the fund
and used exclusively for the purpose of artificial weather modification as
provided in this chapter. (Acts 1972 (64 G.A.) ch. 10S6, § 4.)
361.5 Election on question
Upon request of the weather modification board, the county board of super-
visors shall submit to the owners and tenants of agricultural land in the county
at any general election or special election called for that purpose, the question
of wli ether a tax not to exceed two cents per acre shall be levied annually on
agricultural land. Notice of the election shall be published each week for two
c onsecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation throughout the county-
The notice shall include the date and time of the election and the question to
be voted upon. A majority of the agricultural landowners and tenants voting
shall determine the question. (Acts 1972 (64 G.A.) ch. 1086, § 5.)
361.6 Budget request
The weather modification board annually submit a budget request to the
county board of supervisors. If the annual tax levy is approved as provided
in section 361.5, the weather modification board shall determine the tax levy
needed, not to exceed two cents per acre on agricultural land, to meet the
budget request. The tax shall be levied by the board of supervisors and collected
al the same time and iii the same manner as other property taxes. (Acts 1972
(64 G.A.) ch. 1086, § 6.)
543
S61.7 Cancellation of program
If a tax levy has been authorized under section 361.5, the county board of
supervisors shall, upon receipt of a petition signed by at least one hundred
owners and tenants of agricultural land located in the county, submit to the
owners and tenants of agricultural land at any general election or special
election called for that purpose the following question: "Shall the power to
levy a tax for the administration of an artificial weather modification pro-
gram be canceled?" Notice of the date and time of election and the question
to be voted upon shall be publishd each week for two consecutive weeks
in a newspaper or general circulation throughout the county. If a majority
of the agricultural landowners and tenants voting favor the question, no fur-
ther tax levy as provided in section 361.6 shall be made. (Acts 1972 (64 G.A.)
ch. 1086, §7.)
Kansas
Kan. Stat. §§19-212f; 82a-1401-82a-1425
19-212f. Establishment or participation in weather modification programs;
expenditures ; definition of weather modification. The board of county commis-
sioners of any county is hereby authorized to establish or participate in weather
modification programs and for the purpose of paying the costs thereof are hereby
authorized to expend moneys from the county general fund, moneys derived
from taxes levied therefor or any other funds of the county available for such
purpose and in addition to receive and expend any and all funds which may be
offered or become available from federal or state grants or appropriations, pri-
vate gifts, donations or bequests or from any other source. As used in this act
"weather modification" means and extends to the control, alteration, ameliora-
tion of weather elements including man-caused changes in the natural precip-
itation process, hail suppression or modification and alteration of other weather
phenomena including temperature, wind direction and velocity, and the initiat-
ing, increasing, decreasing and otherwise modifying by artificial methods preci-
pitation in the form of rain, snow, hail, mist or fog through cloud seeding,
electrification or by other means to provide immediate practical benefits. [L.
1975, ch. 74, § 2 ; July 1.]
ARTICLE 14. — KANSAS WEATHER MODIFICATION ACT
Cross references to related sections
Powers of boards of county commissioners, see 19-212f.
Interlocal agreements, see 12-2904.
82a-llf01. Citation of act. This act may be cited as the "Kansas weather
modification act." [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 1 ; July 1.]
82a-llf02. Kansas weather modification act; definitions. As used in this act,
unless the context otherwise requires: (a) "Board" means the Kansas water
resources board ;
(b) "Director" means the executive director of the Kansas water resources
board ;
(c) "Person" means and includes a natural person, a partnership, an organi-
zation, a corporation, a municipality and any department or agency of the state ;
(d) "Research and development operation" or "research and development
project" means an operation which is conducted solely to advance scientific and
technical knowledge ; and
(e) "Weather modification activity" means any operation or experimental
process which has as its objective inducing change, by artificial means, in the
composition, behavior, or dynamics of the atmosphere. [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 2 ;
July 1.]
82a-1403. Same; administration of act; rules and regulations; powers of
board and director. The board is hereby vested with responsibility for the im-
plementation of this act. Within the authority granted to the board, the di-
rector shall be the chief administrative officer for carrying out the powers and
duties provided for in this act. The board may adopt rules and regulations, issue
licenses and permits, conduct hearings, enter into contracts for weather modifi-
cation activities and to do all other things provided for in this act for the
achievement of its purposes, subject to the powers and limitations contained
herein. [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 3 ; July 1.]
544
S2a-l>t0Jf. Same ; advisory committee : membership, duties and compensatiom
(a) The board shall appoint an advisory committee to assist the director in
developing licensing standards and report forms, in conducting studies, in es-
tablishing minimum operation requirements for weather modification activities,
and to advise the board and the director on such other matters, both technical
and general, as the board may deem appropriate.
(&) The advisory committee shall be composed of seven (7) persons desig-
nated by the board who have the appropriate scientific, technical, legal, indus-
trial, agricultural or water resources background to serve in an advisory ca-
pacity relative to weather modification activities and may include such other
persons from the public sector as the board may deem capable of contributing
assistance. Four (4) members of the advisory committee shall be actively en-
gaged in agriculture and shall derive a major portion of their income from
agriculture.
(c) Members of the advisory committee shall serve without compensation but
they shall receive subsistence allowances, mileage and other expenses as pro-
vided in section 1 of 1974 House bill No. 1624 [ 75-3223], while attending meet-
ings of such committee, f L. 1974, ch. 321, § 4 ; July 1.]
82a-l 405. Same; licenses, issuance and limitations; permits, issuance and con-
ditions; studies, hearings and investigations, research and development pro-
mams; expenditure of funds; representation of state in matters relating to
weather modification. («) At the direction of the board, the director may issue
licenses for weather modification activities, as hereinafter provided for in this
act but any licensee shall be limited in the exercise of activities under his
license to the specified method or methods of weather modification activity within
his area of expertise.
(&) At the direction of the board, the director may issue a permit for each
specific weather modification project, which may be comprised of one or more
weather modification activities. Every such permit shall describe (1) the geo-
graphic area within which such activities are to be carried out, (2) the geo-
graphic area to be affected, and (3) duration of the weather modification activ-
ities of the project which period may be non-continuous but which may not
have a total duration exceeding one calendar year from the day of its issuance.
The director shall issue a permit only after it has been established that the
project, as conceived, will provide substantial benefits or that it will advance
scientific knowledge. The director may ask the advisory committee to review
each request for a i>erniit and to advise him thereon.
(c) The director shall make any studies or investigations, obtain any infor-
mation, and hold any hearings that he considers necessary or proper to assist
him in exercising his powers or administering or enforcing the provisions of
this act.
The director may by his own action, or at the request of the advisory com-
mittee, appoint a bearing officer to conduct any hearings required by this act;
said hearings to be conducted under the provisions and within any limitations
of rules and regulations adopted by the board.
(d) In order to assist in expanding the theoretical and practical knowledge
of weather modification, the board may, to the extent that funds are available
therefor, participate in and promote research and development in :
(1) The theory and development of weather modification, including those
aspects relating to procedures, materials, ecological effects, and the attend-
ant legal and social problems;
(2) The utilization of weather modification for domestic, municipal, agri-
cultural, industrial, recreational, and other beneficial purposes ;
(3) The protection of life, health, property, and the general environment,
(c) Subject to any limitations imposed by law, the board in furthering the
purposes of this act may utilize available funds from the state and may accept
federal grants, private gifts, and donations from any source. Except as other-
wise provided by law. t lie board may use any such moneys :
( 1 ) For the administration of this act ;
(2) To encourage research and development projects by public or private
agencies through grants, contracts, or cooperative arrangements;
(3) To contract for Weather modification activities to seek relief from
or to avoid droughts, hail, storms, tires, fog, or other undesirable conditions.
(/) Under the direction of the bBard, the director shall represent the state in
matters pertaining to plans, procedures, or negotiations for cooperative agree-
545
merits, or intergovernmental arrangements relating to weather modification. [L.
1974. ch. 321, § 5; July 1.]
82a-1406. Same; engaging in weather modification without, or in violation of
license or permit ; exemption from payment of fees, (a) No person may engage
in any activity for weather modification or control without a weather modifica-
tion license and a weather modification permit issued by the director. No person
may engage in any activity in violation of any term or condition of a license or
permit issued under this act.
(ft) The board, to the extent it considers exemptions appropriate and de-
sirable, may exempt the following weather modification activities from the fee
requirements of this act :
(1) Research and development operations and experiments conducted
by or under authority of any state or federal department or agency, state
institution of higher education, or nonprofit research organization ;
(2) Laboratory research and experiments ; and
(3) Activities of an emergency nature for protection of public health,
safetv, and welfare including but not limited to fire, frost, hail, sleet, smog,
fog, and drought. [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 6 ; July 1.1
82a-l-i07. Same; license; application; requirements. The director shall issue
a weather modification license to each person who: (a) Applies in writing to
the board in such form as the board shall require ;
( ft ) Pays the license fee, if applicable ; and
(c) Meets at least one of the following requirements :
(1) The applicant shall demonstrate that he (or his official representative)
has had at least eight years of professional experience in weather modifica-
tion field research or activities, and has served for at least three years as
a project director of weather modification activities ;
(2) The applicant shall demonstrate that he has obtained a bacalaureate
degree from a recognized institution of higher learning in engineering,
mathematics, or the physical sciences and has had at least three years of
experience in weather modification field research or activities ; or
(3) The applicant shall demonstrate that he has obtained a baccalaureate
degree from a recognized institution of higher learning in engineering,
mathematics, or the physical sciences and has satisfactorily completed the
equivalent of at least twenty-five (25) semester hours of meteorological
studies at a recognized institution of higher learning and has had at least
two years of practical experience in weather modification research or activ-
ities; and
(d) Demonstrates that he possesses the knowledge, skill, and experience neces-
sary to conduct weather modification activities without unreasonable risk of
injury to persons or property. [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 7 ; July 1.]
8.2a-1408. Same; license fee: license year; renewal, fee: deposit of fees in
general fund. A license shall be issued under this act only upon payment to the
board of a fee of one hundred dollars ($100). Each license shall expire at the
end of the calendar year for which it is issued.
Subject to the limitation of this act, any person licensed under the provisions
of this act may, on or before January 1. each year, renew his license by payment
to the board of an annual fee of one hundred dollars ($100). The board shall
remit all moneys received pursuant to this section to the state treasurer and
the state treasurer shall deposit the same in the state treasury to the credit of
the state general fund. [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 8 ; July 1.]
82a-lJf09. Same ; license ; suspension or revocation ; conditions and procedures.
Any license issued under this act may be suspended or revoked by the board after
notice and hearing, when (1) the licensee is found to have engaged in any activ-
ity prohibited by or under this act, (2) he has practiced fraud or deceit in ob-
taining a license, (3) he has been negligent or guilty of incompetence in engag-
ing in any weather modification activity, or (4) he has violated any require-
ment of this act. In addition to the board, any interested person may make a
formal complaint to the board against any licensee. All formal complaints shall
he in writing, shall be signed by the complainant, and shall specify the charges
against the licensee. Upon receipt of a formal complaint, the board shall make
a preliminary examination thereof, and if it determines that there are reasonable
grounds to believe that the licensee has committed any of the acts for which his
license may be suspended or revoked under this section, it shall set the matter
for hearing, shall give the licensee concerned at least thirty (30) days written
546
notice prior to the time set for the hearing, and shall furnish the licensee a true
and correct copy of the complaint at the time of such notice. Service upon such
licensee shall be deemed to have been made when the notice and a copy of the
complaint are deposited by the board in the United States mail, addressed to
the licensee at the last known address shown in the records and files of the board.
At any hearing before the board, any party may appear either in person or by
counsel, except that the person bringing the complaint shall have the burden of
proof. When authorized by a majority of the board, any member of the board
shall have the authority to administer oaths to witnesses and to issue subpoenas
in connection with any hearing authorized by this section. A transcript shall be
kept of the hearing before the board. The costs of notice and hearing may be
borne by the board or assessed at the discretion of the board. [L. 1974, ch. 321,
§9; July 1.]
82ar-1410. Same; appeals to district court. Any party who deems himself
aggrieved by any decision of the board may appeal to the district court as
provided in K.S.A. 60-2101. [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 10; July 1.]
82a-14H. Same ; permit ; application ; requirements ; financial responsibility.
(a) The director shall issue a weather modification permit to each person who:
(1) Applies in writing to the director for a permit in such form as the
director shall require ;
(2) Holds a valid weather modification license issued under this act;.
(3) Pays the permit fee, if applicable ;
(4) Files with the director proof of ability to respond in damages for
liability on account of accidents arising out of any weather modification
activities to be conducted by him in an amount of not less than fifty thousand
dollars ($50,000) because of bodily injury to or death of one person resulting
from any one accident and, subject to said limit for one person, in an amount
of not less than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) because of bodily
injury to or death of two or more persons resulting from any one ac-
cident, and in an amount of not less than one hundred thousand dollars
($100,000) because of injury to or destruction of the property of others
resulting from any one accident, or in such increased amounts as the
board may require hereunder upon determining that the circumstances of
the particular weather modification project require additional proof of
financial responsibility, except that municipalities and departments or
agencies of the state shall be exempt from the requirements of this para-
graph ; proof of financial responsibility required hereunder may be given
by a certificate of insurance or a bond or a certificate of deposit of
money ;
(5) Submits a complete and satisfactory operational plan for the pro-
posed weather modification project which includes a map of the proposed
operating area which specifies the primary target area and shows the
area reasonably expected to be affected, the name and address of the
licensee, the nature and object of the intended weather modification ac-
tivities, the person or organization on whose behalf it is to be conducted,
a statement showing any expected effect upon the environment, the methods
that will be used in determining and evaluating the proposed weather
modification project, and such other information as may be required by the
director ;
(6) Meets the preceding requirements for a permit and before begin-
ning operations under the proposed weather modification project publishes
a notice of intent to engage in weather modification activities in a news-
paper of general circulation in the county or counties to be affected by
the proposed project. The published notice shall designate the primary
target area and indicate the general area which might be affected. It
shall also indicate the expected duration and intended effect and state that
complete details are available on request from the licensee or the director.
In accordance with information furnished by the director, the notice
shall also specify a time and place for a hearing on the proposed weather
modification project, which will be conducted by the board: and
(7) Furnishes to the director proof of the publication of the notice re-
quired by the foregoing provision.
(h) Before :t permit is issued, the director, or a hearing officer appointed by
him. shall hold the public hearing on the proposed weather modification project
in a place or places within a reasonable proximity of the area expected to be
:i ff eft e 1 by the proposed weather modification activities.
547
(c) No permit may be issued unless the director determines, based on the
information provided in the operational plan for the proposed weather modifica-
tion project and on the testimony and information provided at the public
hearing, that :
(1) If the project is one for profit, the proposed weather modification
activities are designed to provide, and are reasonably expected to provide,,
an economic benefit to the people of the area in which the operation
will be conducted, or will benefit the people of the state of Kansas, and
is scientifically and technically feasible ;
(2) If the project is a scientific or research project, the proposed weather
modification activities offer promise of expanding the knowledge and the
technology of weather modification ;
(3) The project includes adequate safeguards for the protection of proper-
ty, health, safety and welfare ; and
(4) The project is designed to minimize risk and maximize scientific
gains or economic benefits to the people of the state.
(d) The operational plan for the proposed project shall be placed on file with
the director and will be available for public inspection during regular office
hours. [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 11 ; July 1.]
82a-1412. Same; conduct of operations under permit under supervision of
licensee. Operations under weather modification permits may be executed only
by or under the immediate direction and supervision of a licensee or licensees.
[L. 1974, ch. 321 § 12 ; July 1.]
82a-1413. Same; permit fees, renewal; deposit in general fund. The fee for
each weather modification permit under this act or any renewal thereof shall
be one hundred dollars ($100) and shall be paid to the board which shall remit
all such moneys to the state treasurer and the state treasurer shall deposit
the same in the state treasury to the credit of the state general fund. [L. 1974,
ch.321, § 13; July 1.]
82a-1414. Same ; permit for calendar year : emergency, (a) A separate weather,
modification permit shall be required annually on a calendar year basis for each
weather modification project.
(6) The director may grant a weather modification permit on an emergency
basis without prior publication of any required notice in instances, of fire, frost,
hail, sleet, smog, fog drought, or other emergency. In such situations, publica-
tion of notice shall be made as soon as possible but shall not be subject to the
time limits specified elsewhere in this act. [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 14 ; July 1.]
82a-14l5. Same; permit; revision, suspension or modification of terms and
conditions ; procedure ; licensee to notify director of emergencies. ( a ) The direc-
tor may revise, suspend, or modify the terms and conditions of a permit if :
(1) He first notifies the licensee and affords the licensee a reasonable
opportunity for a hearing on the need for a revision, suspension, or modifica-
tion and, after such hearing, he finds that revision, suspension, or modifica-
tion is necessary to protect the health, safety, or property of any person or
to protect the environment ; or
(2) He finds that an emergency situation exists, or is impending, which
would endanger life, property, or the environment, in which case he may,
on his own initiative, without giving prior notice or conducting a hearing,
immediately modify the conditions of a permit, or order the temporary sus-
pension of the permit.
(6) Upon ordering revision, suspension or modification under paragraph (2)
of subsection (a) of this section, the director shall within ten (10) days there-
after hold a hearing on the question of permanently revising, suspending, or
modifying the terms and conditions of the permit and shall notify the licensee
at the time of ordering the revision, suspension, or modification of the time
and place that he will hear the matter. A licensee's failure to comply with an
order of the director to temporarily suspend or change the authorized activity
shall be grounds for immediate revocation of the permit and of the operator's
license.
(c) It shall be the responsibility of the licensee conducting anv weather
modification activity to notify the director of any emergency that the licensee
could be expected to reasonably foresee, including any existing emergency sit-
uations described in paragraph (2) of subsection (a) of this section that, might
in any way be caused or affected by weather modification activities. Failure by
the licensee to so notify the director of any such existing emergnecy, or any
548
impending emergency that the licensee should have reasonably foreseen, may
be grounds for revocation of the permit and the operator's license. [L. 1974, ch.
321. §15; July 1.]
82a-1416. Same ; licensee confined to terms and conditions of permit. When a
weather modification permit has been issued, the licensee shall confine his
weather modification activities within the limits of time and area specified in
the permit, except to the extent that the limits are modified by the director.
He shall also comply with any terms and conditions of the permit as originally
issued or as subsequently revised or modified by the director. [L. 1974, ch. 321,
§16; July 1.]
82d'-1417. Same; reports of activities; form and content, (a) Any person con-
ducting weather modification activities in Kansas or operations that affect con-
ditions within Kansas shall file reports at such time or times and in the manner
and form as the board may require.
(6) The director shall develop report forms that shall provide for reporting
the methods employed, the type of equipment used, the kind and amount of
each material used, the times and places the equipment was operated, the name
and address of each individual other than the licensee who participated or
assisted in the activities, any environmental effects that have or are believed
to have occurred, and any other data as the board may require. [L. 1974, ch. 321,
§ 17; July 1.]
82a-l/fl8. Same ; suspension or revocation of permit ; refusal to renew license
or issue additional permit, (a) The director shall suspend or revoke a permit
if he finds that the licensee no longer meets the quaifications or conditions of the
original permit or has violated any provision of this act.
(&) At the direction of the board, the director may refuse to renew the license
of. or to issue another permit to, any applicant who has failed to comply with
any provision of this act. [L. 1974, ch. 321, § 18 ; July 1.]
82dr-llfl9. Same : suspension or revocation of license or permit ; notice of hear-
ing, (a) Except as provided in section 15 [82a-1415] of this act relating to the
director, the board or the director shall not suspend or revoke a license or per-
mit without first giving the licensee reasonable notice and a reasonable oppor-
tunity to be heard with respect to the ground for possible suspension or
revocation.
(b) Hearings under this section shall be conducted by the board or the
director in the manner provided for in section 9 [82a-1409] of this act. [L. 1974,
ch. 321, § 19; July 1.]
82a^l420. Same : state and local officers immune from liability ; issuance of
permit not state endorsement. Officers and employees of the state or any depart-
ment or agency thereof, and officers and employees of any county or municipality
or other public agency of the state, shall be immune from liability resulting
from any weather modification activity approved or conducted by them or under
their authority under the provisions and limitations of this act. The issuance
of a permit to conduct weather modification activities does not constitute state
endorsement of any weather modification activities conducted with respect to
that permit. [L. 1974. ch. 321. § 20 ; July 1.]
x2a-1Jf2l. Same: operation without license or permit; order to cease; enforce-
ment. The director may order any person who is found to be conducting weather
modification activity without a license and permit to cease and desist from said
operation. Anv such order shall be enforceable in any court of competent juris-
diction. |"L. 1974. ch. 321, § 21 ; July 1.]
82a-li22. Same; license or permit no defense in action for damages or in-
junctive relief. The fact that a person holds a license or a permit under this act,
or that he has complied with all requirements established pursuant to this act,
shall not be a defense in actions for damages or injunctive relief brought against
him. IX. 1974. eli. 321. § 22 ; July 1.]
S2a-1423. Same violations of act, misdemeanor. Any person conducting a
weather modification activity without first having procured a required license
and permit, or who shall knowingly make a false statement in an application
for a license or permit, or who shall fail to file any report or reports as required by
This act. or who shall conduct any weather modification activity after a revocation
of his license or the denial, revocation, modification, or temporary suspension of
his weather modification permit therefor, or who shall violate any other provi-
sions of this act. shall be guilty of a class B misdemeanor. Each day that any
such unauthorized weather modification activity is conducted shall constitute
a separate offense. [ L. 1974, ch. 321, § 23 ; July 1.]
549
S2(i-142Jf. Severability of act. If any word, phrase, sentence, or provision of
this act is determined to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other
provisions of this act and they shall be given effect without the invalid provi-
sion, and to this end the provisions of this act are declared to be severable. [L.
1974, ch. 321, § 24; July 1.]
82a-lJf25. Participation by counties in weather modification programs ; tax
levy : procedure ; protest petitions. The board of county commissioners of any
county is hereby authorized to establish or participate in weather modification
programs and for the purpose of paying the costs thereof is authorized to levy
a tax of not to exceed two (2) mills upon the assessed tangible valuation of prop-
erly in the county and to expend such moneys for weather modification purposes :
Provided, In counties of this state having a population of more than one hundred
eighty thousand (180,000) and not more than two hundred twenty thousand
(220.000) and an assessed tangible valuation of more than three hundred fifty
million (350,000,000) and not more than three hundred sixty-five million
(365.000,000) shall be excluded. No such levy shall be made until a resolution
authorizing the same shall be adopted by the board of county commissioners
stating the specific purpose for which such levy is made, the amount of the
proposed levy and the number of years such tax levy shall be made and until
such resolution has been published once each week for three (3) consecutive
weeks in the official county newspaper. Whereupon any such levy may be made
unless a petition requesting an election upon the proposition signed by electors
equal in number to not less than five percent (5%) of the qualified electors of
such county is filed in the office of the county election officer within sixty (60)
days following the last publication of such resolution. In the event any such peti-
tion is filed, no levy shall be made without the same having been approved by a
majority of the electors of such county voting at an election called and held
thereon within ninety (90) days after the last publication of such resolution
or at the next general election if held within such time. Such election shall be
noticed, called and held in the manner provided for by the provisions of K. S. A.
1976 Supp. 10-120. Such tax levy shall be in addition to all other tax levies
authorized or limited by law and shall not be subject to nor within the limita-
tions upon the levy of taxes imposed by K. S. A. 1976 Supp. 79-5001 to 79-5016,
inclusive, and amendments thereto.
The board of county commissioners is authorized to expend any other funds
of the county available for any such purpose and, in addition, to receive and
expend any and all funds which may be offered or become available for am
such purpose. [L. 1976, ch. 114, § 1 : July 1.]
Louisiana
La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 2201-2208
Chapter 25. Weather Modification
Sec.
2201. Sovereign right to use of moisture.
2202. Definitions.
2203. Necessity for license : application.
2204. Licenses : fees : expiration ; revocation.
2205. Disposition of fees.
2206. Penalty.
2207. Qualifications and requirements : conditions.
2208. Evaluation of operations ; reports.
§ 2201. Sovereign right to use of moisture
It is hereby declared that the state of Louisiana claims its sovereign right
to the use for the best interest of its people of the moisture contained in the
clouds and atmosphere within its state boundaries. (Acts 1956, Xo. 350. § 1.)
§ 2202. Definitions
The term "weather modification", as used in this Chapter, means the chanaing
or controlling by chemical, mechanical, or physical methods the occurrence of
lightning or the precipitation of rain, hail. mist, sleet, or snow.
The term "Commissioner", as used in this chapter, means the commissioner of
the Louisiana State Department of Agriculture and Immigration. (Acts 1956, Xo.
350, §§ 2. 3.)
§ 2203. Xeeessity for lieense; applieation
Any person who engages in weather modification shall prior to engaging in
such activity obtain a license from commissioner in accordance with the pro-
550
cedure established the commissioner. Each application for a license shall be
accompanied by a fee of twenty-five dollars. (Acts 1956, No. 350, § 4.)
§ 220 If. Licenses; fees; expiration; revocation
A license fee of one hundred dollars shall be paid by any person issued a
weather modification license, in addition to the application fee provided in R.S.
37 :2203. Each such license shall expire one year after the date such license is
issued and shall be revocable at any time, by the Commissioner, in accordance
with such procedure as the commissioner may establish. (Acts 1956, No. 350, § 5.)
§ 2205. Disposition of fees
The money collected from fees provided in R.S. 37:2203 and R.S. 37:2204
shall be deposited with the state treasurer to be credited to the general fund of
the state of Louisiana. (Acts 1956, No. 350, § 6.)
§ 2206. Penalty
Any person engaging in weather modification without a license shall be guilty
of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not exceeding five hundred dollars for each
separate offense. (Acts 1956, No. 350, § 7.)
§ 2207. Qualifications and requirements; conditions
The commissioner shall determine the qualifications and requirements which
applicants must meet in order to receive a license to engage in weather modifica-
tion and shall establish the conditions under which weather modification opera-
tions may be carried out. (Acts 1956, No. 350, § 8.)
§ 2208. Evaluation of operations ; reports
The commissioner shall evaluate each weather modification operation and
publish the results of such evaluation in an annual report. (Acts 1956, No. 350,
§9.)
Minnesota
Minn. Stat. Ann. §§ 42.01-42.14
1977 Session — Weathek Modification
CHAPTER 4 26
S. F. No. 73 [Coded]
An ACT relating to weather modification; prescribing powers and duties for the commis-
sioner of agriculture ; providing for weather modification research ; requiring the ob-
taining of licenses and permits prior to engaging in weather modification ; prohibiting
the use of cloud seeding apparatus located on the ground; prescribing penalties; ap-
propriating money
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Minnesota:
SECTION 1
42.01 Policy
The legislature finds that it is necessary for the state to regulate weather
modification to protect its citizens, but nothing in sections 42.01 to 42.14 shall
be construed to encourage or promote weather modification.
SECTION 2
42.02 Definitions
Subdivision 1. For the purposes of sections 42.01 to 42.14, the terms defined
in this section have the meanings given them.
Subdivision 2. "Weather modification" means any activity performed in con-
nection with placing or attempting to place any substance in the atmosphere or
clouds within the atmosphere, including fog, with the intention of and for the
purpose of producing artificial changes in the composition, motions, and result-
ing behavior of the atmosphere or clouds within the atmosphere, including fog.
Subdivision 3. "Person" means any person, firm, association, organization, part-
nership, company, corporation, private or public, county, city, trust or other pub-
lic agency.
Subdivision 4. "Operation" moans the performance of weather modification
activities entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempting to produce, a
certain modifying effect within one geographical area over one continuing time
interval not exceeding one year.
Subdivision 5. '^Commissioner" means the commissioner of agriculture.
551
SECTION 3
42.03 Sovereign right claimed by state
It is declared that the state of Minnesota claims its sovereign right to use
for the best interest of its residents the moisture contained in the clouds and
atmosphere within its sovereign state boundaries.
section 4
42.04 Commissioner; powers and duties
Subdivision 1. Powers. The commissioner of agriculture may :
(a) pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 15, adopt rules necessary to
implement the license and permit program established pursuant to sections
42.01 to 42.14 ;
(b) enter into contracts or memoranda of agreement and do all things
necessary to cooperate with the United States government, and to qualify
for, accept and disburse any private grant intended for the administration
of sections 42.01 to 42.14 ;
(c) cooperate with other states to jointly carry out research and planning
in weather modification ;
(d) advise persons, groups, and local units of government on weather modi-
fication and distribute informational material relating to weather modifica-
tion and review and comment on all county programs of weather modifica-
tion ; and
(e) carry on research related to weather modification including evaluation
of the effects of weather modification activities within the state by staff mem-
bers, or by contract. Evaluation of weather modification programs shall,
if practical and within limits of available funding, including components of
economic and environmental analysis which delineate the economic and en-
vironmental implications of the programs.
Subdivision 2. Duties. The commissioner of agriculture shall :
(a) utilize to the extent possible the facilities and technical resources of
public and private institutions in the state ;
(b) by rule adopted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 15, require
persons engaged in weather modification to submit reports of their activities
and operations and any other information deemed necessary ;
(c) on or before January 15 of each year, submit a report to the legislature
and governor describing the weather modification operations within the state
during the preceding year and the social, economic and environmental impact
of the operations. The report shall also include recommendations for legis-
lative action and any other information useful to the legislature.
SECTION 5
42.05 County programs of weather modifications
Counties may, only after approval of the commissioner and subject to the
requirements of sections 42.01 to 42.14, conduct programs of weather modifica-
tion and expend money therefor. At least two weeks published notice in a
newspaper of general circulation within the county must be given before the
program of weather modification may begin. If, within 30 days of a decision
by a county to expend funds for weather modification, a petition signed by
voters in the county equal in number to ten percent of the votes cast in the
county in the last general election or 2,000 voters, whichever is less, request-
ing a referendum on the proposed expenditure is filed with the county auditor,
the funds shall not be expended until it has been submitted to the voters at a
general or special election and a majority of votes cast on the question of the
expenditure of the funds are affirmative. No program may be conducted
within the county without prior approval by the county board.
SECTION 6
42. 06 Licenses
Subdivision 1. No person shall engage in weather modification without a
license issued by the commissioner. Applications for weather modification
licenses shall be on forms prescribed and furnished by the commissioner. The
applicant shall pay a fee of $100. The license shall be valid for one year.
552
The commissioner may waive the license fee in situations he deems appro-
priate.
Subdivision 2. The commissioner shall issue licenses only to applicants who
demonstrate good character, adequate education and sufficient competence in the
field of meteorology and cloud physics to engage in weather modification. At
a minimum, each applicant shall meet at least one of the following:
(1) demonstrate that he has at least eight years of experience at the pro-
fessional level in weather modification field research or operations, at least
three of these years as a professional director ; or
(2) has obtained a baccalaureate degree in engineering, mathematics, or
the physical sciences plus three years experience in weather modification field
research or operations ; or
(3) has obtained a baccalaureate degree in meteorology, or a degree in en-
gineering or the physical sciences which includes, or is in addition to. the
equivalent of at least 25 semester hours of meteorological course work and
two years practical experience in weather modification operations or re-
search.
If the applicant is an organization, the competence must be demonstrated
by the individuals who are to supervise and conduct the weather modification
Subdivision 3. The commissioner may renew a license annually if the applicant
by the individuals who are to supervise and conduct the weather modification,
fee of $100.
Subdivision 4. The moneys collected as fees shall be deposited with the state
treasurer in the general fund.
SECTION 7
42.07 Suspension ; revocation ; refusal to renew license
The commissioner shall, subject to the provisions of chapter 15, suspend,
revoke or refuse to renew a license for any one or any combination of the
following causes :
( 1 ) Incompetency ;
(2) Dishonest practice :
(3) False or fraudulent representation in obtaining a license or permit un-
der sections 42.01 to 42.14 or rules promulgated thereunder :
(4) Failure to comply with any of the provisions of sections 42.01 to 42.14
or of rules promulgated thereunder : or
(5) Aiding other persons who fail to comply with any of the provisions of
sections 42.01 to 42.14 or rules promulgated thereunder.
SECTION 8
Jf2.08 Investigation
The commissioner may investigate any operation or research and develop-
ment activities of any person applying for a license and of any person holding
or claiming to hold a license or permit.
SECTION 9
J/2.09 Permits
Subdivision 1. No person shall conduct an operation without a permit is-
sued by the commissioner. Applications for permits shall be on forms pre-
scribed and furnished by tin1 commissioner. Permits shall be issued only to
applicants who hold a valid weather modification license, pay a fee of $100
and furnish proof of financial responsibility pursuant to subdivision 2. Prior
to conducting an operation, the permittee shall publish notice of the operation
as the commissioner shall require and shall give written notice to the county
boards of the counties over which the operation is to be conducted and coun-
ties contiguous thereto. The permit shall be valid for one year or until the
operation terminates, whichever first occurs.
Subdivision 2. The applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the com-
missioner that he has the ability to respond to damages for liability which
might reasonably result from the operation for which the permit is sought.
Subdivision 3. The fees collected for permits shall be deposited with the state
treasurer in the general fund.
Subdivision 4. To the extent the commissioner deems necessary, emergency
weather modification operations for the purpose of controlling fire, frost,
sleet, hail. fog. or wind shall be exempt from the permit requirements.
553
Subdivision 5. The commissioner may renew a permit annually if the applicant
has the qualifications necessary for issuance of an original permit and pays
a fee of $100.
Subdivision 6. No permit shall be issued to use a cloud seeding apparatus which
emits cloud seeding material into the air when located on or in contact with
the ground.
Subdivision 7. Before a permit is issued, the commissioner may hold an informal
hearing on the permit, at a location within the same geographic area as the
proposed operation will be conducted.
Subdivision 8. No more than one weather modification permit shall be issued
for a given geographic area.
Subdivision 9. The applicant must submit a complete operational plan for each
proposed project prepared by the licensee who shall conduct the operation,
which shall include, but not be limited to :
(a) a specific statement of the nature and objectives of the intended opera-
tion,
(b) a map of the proposed operating area which specifies the primary target
area and shows the area reasonably expected to be affected and a raingauge
system for both seeded and downwind areas,
(c) an estimate of the amount of cloud seeding material expected to be
placed in the clouds,
(d) a statement of the types of clouds to be seeded and identification of
a procedure for random selection of at least a portion of the clouds to be
seeded during the operation,
(f ) the name and address of the licensee,
(g) the person or organization on whose behalf it is to be conducted,
(h) a statement showing any expected effect upon the environment and
results of weather modification operations, and methods of determining and
properly evaluating that operation, and any other detailed information as
may be required to describe the operation and its proposed method of evalua-
tion.
SECTIOX 10
-42.10 Suspension; revocation and refusal to renew permit
Subdivision 1. The commissioner shall, subject to chapter 15, suspend or
revoke a permit if it appears that the permittee no longer has the qualifica-
tions necessary for the issuance of an original permit or has violated any
provision of sections 42.01 to 42.14 or of any rules promulgated thereunder.
Subdivision 2. The commissioner shall, subject to chapter 15, refuse to renew
a permit if it appears from the operational records and reports of the permit-
tee that an original permit would not be issuable for the operation, or if the
permittee has violated any provision of sections 42.01 to 42.14 or of any rules
promulgated thereunder.
SECTIOX 11
42.11 Modification of permit
Subdivision 1. The commissioner may revise the conditions and limits of a
permit if :
(a) The permittee is given notice and a hearing, pursuant to chapter 15, on
whether there is a need for the revision and the commissioner finds that a
modification of the conditions and limits of a permit is necessary to protect
the public health, safety or welfare, or the environment.
(b) If it appears to the commissioner that an emergency situation exists or
is impending which could endanger the public safety, health or welfare, or
the environment, the commissioner may, without prior notice or a hearing,
immediately modify the conditions and limits of a permit, or order temporary
suspension of the permit. The order shall include notice of a hearing to be
held pursuant to chapter 15 within ten days thereafter on the question of per-
manently modifying the conditions and limits, continuing the suspension of
the permit, removing the changes or lifting the suspension.
Subdivision 2. Failure to comply with an order temporarily suspending an op-
eration or modifying the conditions and limits of a permit shall be grounds for
immediate revocation of the permit and of the license of the person control-
ling the operation.
Subdivision 3. The permittee shall notify the commissioner of any emergency
which can reasonably be foreseen, or of any existing emergency situations
554
which might be caused or affected by the operation. Failure by the permittee-
to so notify the commissioner may be grounds, at the discretion of the com-
missioner, for revocation of the permit and of the license of the person con-
trolling the operation.
SECTION 12
42.12 Penalty for violations
Any person violating any of the provisions of sections 42.01 to 42.14 or of
any rule promulgated thereunder is guilty of a misdemeanor, and each day
such violation continues constitutes a separate offense.
SECTION 13
42.13 Legal action
Other than in legal actions charging failure to obtain a license and permit,
the fact that a person holds a license or was issued a permit under sections
42.01 to 42.14, or that a person has complied with the rules made by the com-
missioner pursuant to sections 42.01 to 42.14, is not admissible as a defense in
any legal action which may be brought under this section against such person.
SECTION 14
42.14 Injunction
The commissioner may, in addition to the other remedies provided in sections
42.01 to 42.14 apply to a district court having venue and jurisdiction, for an
injunction to restrain repetitious violations of the provisions of sections 42.01
to 42.14 and of any rule promulgated thereunder.
SECTION 15. APPROPRIATION
There is appropriated from the general fund to the commissioner the sum
of $75,000 for the biennium ending June 30, 1979 for administrative expenses
incurred in fulfiling the provisions of this act.
SECTION 16. EFFECTIVE DATE
Section 5 of this act is effective on the day following its final enactment. Sec-
tions 1 to 4 and sections 6 to 16 are effective January 1, 1978.
Approved June 2, 1977.
Montana
Mont. Rev. Code Ann. §§ 89-310-89-331
Chapter 3 — Weather Modification Activities
Sec.
89-310. Definitions.
89-312. Acquisition of property — acceptance and expenditure of funds — research and de-
velopment authority.
89-312.1. Standards for research in weather modification control.
89-313. License and permit required for weather modification and control.
89-314. Department to review applications — exemptions.
89-315. Issuance of license — qualifications of licensees.
89—316. Term of license — renewal.
89-317. License fee.
89-318. Issuance of permits — requirements for permit — hearing.
89—319. Separate permit for each operation.
89-320. Notice of intention to apply for permit — activities limited by terms of permit.
89—321. Contents of notice of intention.
89-322. Publication of notice of intention.
89-323. Proof of financial responsibility by applicant.
89-324. Permit fee — time of payment.
89-325. Earmarked revenue fund.
89—32(5. Records of operations maintained by licensees.
S9-327. Reports of operations.
89-328. Records and reports open to public.
89—329. Termination of licenses and permits by board.
89-330. State and agents not liable for acts of private persons.
89 931. Violation as misdemeanor — continuing violations.
89-301 to 89-309. (349.54 to 349.02) Repealed.
repeal
These sections (Sees. 1 to 9, Ch. 176, L. 1935), relating to development of state
resources by the state planning board, were repealed by Sec. 10, Ch. 19, Laws
1967.
555
89-310. Definitions. Unless the context requires otherwise, in this chapter:
(1) "Weather modification and control" means changing or controlling, or at-
tempting to change or control, by artificial methods, the natural development of
atmospheric cloud forms or precipitation forms which occur in the troposphere.
(2) "Research and development" means theoretical analysis, exploration and
experimentation, and the extension of investigative findings and theories of a
scientific and technical nature into practical application for experimental and
demonstration purposes, including the experimental production and testing of
models, devices, equipment, materials, and processes.
(3) "Department" means the department of natural resources and conservation
provided for in Title 82A, chapter 15.
(4) "Board" means the board of natural resources and conservation provided
for in section 82A-1509.
89-312. Acquistion of property — acceptance and expenditure of funds — re-
search and development authority. In addition to any other acts authorized by law
the department may :
(1) acquire materials, equipment and facilities as are necessary to per-
form its duties under this act ;
(2) receive any funds which may be offered or become available from
federal grants or appropriations, private gifts, donations, bequests, or any
other source and unless their use is restricted, may expend the funds for
the administration of this act ;
(3) make such studies and investigations, and obtain such information
as the department may deem necessary in exercising its authority in the
administration or enforcement of this act ;
(4) co-operate with public or private agencies in the performance of the
department's functions or duties and in furtherance of the purposes of this
act ;
(5) represent the state in any and all matters pertaining to plans, proce-
dures or negotiations for interstate compacts relating to weather modifica-
tion and control ;
(6) enter into co-operative agreements with the United States gov-
ernment or any of its agencies, or with the various counties and cities of this
state or with any private or public agencies for conducting weather modifica-
. tion or cloud seeding operations ;
(7) act for and represent the state and the counties, cities and private or
public agencies in contracting with private concerns for the performance of
weather modifications or cloud seeding operations ; and
(8) conduct and may make arrangements including contracts and agree-
ments for the conduct of, research and development activities relating to :
(a) the identification and evaluation of meteorological, environ-
mental, ecological, agricultural, economic, hydrological and sociological
impacts of weather modification in Montana ;
(b) the theory and development of methods of weather modification
and control, including processes, materials and devices relating thereto ;
(c) the utilization of weather modification and control for agricul-
tural, industrial, commercial, recreational and other purposes ;
,(d) the protection of life and property during research and opera-
tional activities.
89-312.1. Standards for research in weather modification control. The board
may establish by rule standards and instruction to govern the carrying out of
research and development or projects in weather modification and control as it
deems necessary or desirable to minimize danger to health, safety, welfare or
property.
89-313. License and permit required for weather modification and control.
No person shall engage in activities for weather modification and control except
under, and in accordance with, a license and a permit issued by the board
authorizing such activities.
89-314. Department to review applications — exemptions. The department shall
review all applications for weather modification activities, and the board may
provide by rule for exempting from the license and permit requirements of this
act:
(1) research, development, and experiments by state and federal agen-
cies, institutions of higher learning and bona fide nonprofit research orga-
nizations and their agents ;
(2) laboratory research and experiments ;
556
(3) activities of an emergency character for protection against fire,
frost, sleet, or fog : and
(4) activities normally engaged in for purposes other than those of
inducing, increasing, decreasing, or preventing precipitation or hail.
8H-.il ~>. Issuance of license — qualifications of licensees. The license to engage
in the field of meteorology to the satisfaction of the board. If the applicant is an
with procedures and subject to conditions the board may by rule establish to
effectuate the provisions of this act. to applicants who demonstrate competence
in the field of meteorology to the satisfaction of the board. If the applicant is an
organization, these requirements must be met by the individual who will be
in charge of the operation for the applicant.
89-316. Term of license — renewal. The license shall be issued for a period
to expire at the end of the calendar year in which it is issued and, if the
licensee possesses the qualifications necessary for the issuance of a new license,
shall upon application be renewed at the expiration of the period.
59-517. Lie. use fee A license shall be issued or renewed only upon the pay-
ment to the department of one hundred dollars ($100) for the license or renewal.
89-318. Issuance of permits — requirements for permit — hearing. (1) The per-
mits shall he issued in accordance with procedures and subject to conditions the
hoard may by rule establish to effectuate this chapter, only :
( a ) if the applicant is licensed pursuant to this chapter ;
ili) if sufficient notice of intention is published and proof of publication is
filed as required in section 89-322 ;
(c) if an applicant furnishes proof of financial responsibility in an
amount to be determined by the board as required in section 89-323;
(d) if the fee for the permit is paid as required in section 89-324 ;
(e) if the weather modification and control activities to be conducted are
determined by the board to be for the general welfare and the public good.
(2) The department shall hold a public hearing in the area to be affected by
the issuance of the permit, if the board determines that a hearing is necessary.
The department may in its discretion assess the permit applicant for the costs
incurred by the department in holding the hearing.
89-319. Separate permit for each operation. '"Operation" means the per-
formance of weather modification and control activities entered into for the
purpose of producing or attempting to produce, a certain modifying effect within
ime (1) geographical area over one continuing time interval not exceeding one
(1) year.
89h320. Notice of intention to apply for permit — activities limited by terms
of permit. Before undertaking any weather modification and control activities,
the applicant for a permit shall file with the department, and also have published,
a notice of intention. If a permit is issued, the holder of the permit shall confine
his activities to the time and area limits set forth in the notice of intention,
unless modified by the board. His activities shall conform to any conditions
imposed by the board. The permit may not be sold or transferred.
89^-821. Contents of notice of intention. The notice of intention shall set
forth at least the following:
(1) the name and address of the applicant ;
(2) the nature, purpose, and objective of the intended operation and
the person or organization on whose behalf it is to be conducted :
(3) the area in which, and the approximate time during which, the
operation will be conducted ;
(4) the area which is intended to be affected by the operation:
(5) the materials and methods to be used in conducting the operation.
(History : En. Sec. 12, Ch. 20. L. 1967.)
89-o22. Publication of notice of intention, (1) The applicant shall have
notice of intention, or that portion thereof including the items specified in section
89-321, published at least once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks in a news-
paper having a general circulation and published within any county in which
the operation is to be conducted and in which the affected area is located, or. if
the operation is to be conducted in more than one (1) county or if the affected
area is located in more than one (1) county or is located in a county other than
the one in which t lie operation is to be conducted, then in newspapers having a
general circulation and published within each of the counties.
<2> Proof of publication, made in the manner provided by law, shall be filed
by the applicant with the department sooner than the sixteenth day after the
date of the last publication of the notice.
557
89-323. Proof of financial responsibility by applicant. Proof of financial re-
sponsibility may be furnished by an applicant by his showing, to the satisfaction
of the board, ability to respond in damages for liability which might reasonably
be attached to, or result from, his weather modification and control activities.
(History : En. Sec. 14, Ch. 20. L. 1967.)
89-324. Permit fee — time of payment. The fee to be paid by each applicant for
a permit shall be equivalent to one per cent (1%) of the estimated cost of such
operation, the estimated cost to be computed by the department from the evidence
available to it. The fee is due and payable to the department as of the date of
issuance of the permit by the board ; however, if the applicant is able to give
satisfactory security for the payment of the balance he may be permitted to com-
mence the operation, and a permit may be issued therefor, upon the payment of
not less than fifty per cent (50%) of the fee. The balance due shall be paid
within three (3) months from the date of termination of the operation as pre-
scribed in the permit.
89-325. Earmarked revenue fund. All license and permit fees and fines col-
lected under this chapter shall be deposited in the earmarked revenue fund for
use by the department in the administration of this chapter.
89-326. Records of operations maintained by licensees. Every licensee shall
keep and maintain a record of all operations conducted by him under his license
and each permit, showing :
(1) The method employed ;
(2) Type of equipment used ;
(3) Kinds and amounts of material used ;
(4) Times and places of operation of the equipment ;
(5) Names and addresses of all individuals participating or assisting in
the operation :
(6) Any other general information as the department may require.
89-327. Reports of operations. The department shall require written reports,
in a manner as it provides, of each operation for which a permit is issued. The
department shall also require reports from any organization that is exempt from
license and permit requirements as provided in section 89-314.
89-328. Records and reports open to public. The records and reports in the
custody of the department shall be open for public examination.
89-329. Termination of licenses and permits by board. After notice to the
licensee and a reasonable opportunity for a hearing, the board may modify, sus-
pend, revoke, or refuse to renew, any license or permit issued if it appears that
the licensee no longer possesses the qualifications necessary or if it appears that
the licensee has violated any of the provisions of this act ; or in the case of a
modification, that it is necessary for the protection of the health or the property
of any person.
(History : En. Sec. 20, Ch. 20, L. 1967.)
89-330. State and agents not liable for acts of private persons. Nothing in this
act shall be construed to impose or accept any liability or responsibility on the
part of the state, the board, the department or any state officials or employees for
any weather modification and control activities of any private person or group.
89-331. Violation as misdemeanor — continuing violations. A person violating
any provision of this act is guilty of a misdemeanor, and a continuing violation is
punishable as a separate offense for each day during which it occurs.
Nebraska
Neb. Rev. Stat. §§2-2401—2-2449; 81-829.45
Article 24 — Weather Control
(a) Weather Control Commission
Sec.
2-2401. Weather control ; declaration of policy.
2-2402. Weather control : terms, defined.
2-2403. Weather Control Commission ; administration of act : Department of Agriculture.
2-2404. Weather Control Commission ; establishment ; composition ; appointment ; term ;
no salary ; expenses.
2-2405. Weather Control Commission ; duties.
2—2406. Weather control ; modification activities ; license ; issuance : expiration ; revocation.
2-2407. Weather control; artificial precipitation: application; license; fees; payment to
State Treasurer ; credited to General Fund.
2—2408. Weather Control Commission : cooperation with other agencies.
2-2409. Weather control : engaging in artificial weather modification without license ;
violation ; penalty.
34-S57— 79— 3S
558
(b) Weather Control Districts
See.
2-2410 to 2-2427. Repealed. Laws 1959, c. 9. § 24.
2-2428. Weather control districts ; authorization.
2-2429. Weather control districts ; initiation ; petition ; signatures required.
2-2430. Weather control districts : petition ; contents.
2-2431. Weather control districts ; examination of petition ; order for hearing ; notice.
2-2432. Weather control districts ; hearing ; change of boundaries.
2-2433. Weather control districts ; hearing ; order ; appeal.
2-2434. Weather control districts ; Secretary of State ; election ; fix date.
2-2435. Weather control districts : notice to election commissioner or county clerk ; state-
ment of question to be submitted.
2-2436. Weather control districts ; election commissioner or county clerk ; notice of elec-
tion : publication.
2-2437. Weather control district ; election ; how conducted ; certification of results ; resub-
mission of question.
2-2438. Weather control district ; body politic ; sue and be sued ; directors not liable for
debts.
2-2439. Weather control district ; board of directors : oath ; bond : vacancies.
2-2440. Weather control district ; board of directos ; election of successors ; no filing fee
required.
2-2441. Weather control district : board of directors ; no compensation ; expenses.
2-2442. Weather control district ; officers : election ; books : records ; audit.
2-2443. Weather control district ; board of directors : general powers.
2—2444. Weather control district ; taxes : levy ; limit of levy ; certification ; collection.
2-2445. Weather control district ; warrants ; issuance ; payment : registration ; interest.
2-244(3. Weather control district ; program for weather control ; contact ; seeding outside
of boundaries of district ; violation ; penalty.
2-2447. Weather control district ; dissolution of district ; election ; how conducted ; dis-
posal of funds ; debts ; tax ; levy.
2 2448. Weather control district ; act ; how cited.
2-2449. Weather control district ; formed under prior act : validation.
(a) Weather Control Commission
2-2 401. Weather control; declaration of policy. (1) It is hereby declared that
the State of Nebraska claims its sovereign right to tbe use, for the best interests
of its residents, of the moisture contained in the clouds and atmosphere within its
sovereign state boundaries.
(2) While weather modification is at present a reality, the ultimate extent to
which it may be utilized is speculative. The application of such measures should
have proper safeguards and supply sufficient data and accurate information in
order to protect life, property and the public interest.
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7, § 1, p. 101.
2-2J/02. Weather control; terms, defined. When used in sections 2-2401 to
2-2409, unless the context otherwise requires :
(1) Commission shall mean the Weather Control Commission created by
sections 2-2401 to 2-2409 ;
(2) Department shall mean the Department of Agriculture ;
(3) Experimentation and research and development, shall mean theoretical
exploration and experimentation and the extension of investigative findings and
theories of a scientific or technical nature in the practical application for experi-
mental and demonstrative purposes, including the experimental producing and
testing of model devices, equipment, materials, and processes : and
(4) Weather modification shall mean initiating, changing, or controlling tbe
course or effects of tbe forces, measures, and otber factors constituting weather
phenomena, including temperature, wind direction and velocity, and tbe inducing.
Li creasing, decreasing, and preventing by artificial methods, of precipitation
in the form of rain. snow. hail, sleet, mist, or fog.
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7, § 2, p. 101.
2-2/f0->. Weather Control Commission; administration of act; Depart went o£
Agriculture. Tbe department shall administer and enforce the provisions of
sections 2-2401 to 2-2409 and shall have and may exercise any or all of the admin-
istrative powers conferred hereinafter by sections 2-2401 to 2-2409.
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7. § 3, p. 101.
2-2'iOJf. Weather Control Commission; establishment; composition; appoint-
ment; term; no salary; crpenses. There is hereby established a Weather Control
Commission, composed of the Director of Agriculture, the Dean of the College
of Agriculture of tbe University of Nebraska, the Director of the Conservation
and Survey Division of the University of Nebraska, the head of the physics
department of the University of Nebraska, and four additional members, inter-
ested in weather modification, who shall be appointed annually by the Governor
for a one-year term commencing January 1. The members of the commission
559
shall serve without salary, but shall be reimbursed for their actual and necessary
expenses while in the performance of their duties.
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7, § 4, p. 102. m
2-2J,05. Weather Control Commission; duties. The Commission shall perform
the following duties : . ■ . ,
(1) Elect annually from its membership a chairman, vice-chairman, and
(2) Determine the procedures, requirements, conditions, and professional
standards under which licenses to applicants to conduct artificial weather modi-
fication operations may be issued ;
(3) Determine who shall be issued a license, and make recommendations to the
department which shall issue the license ;
(4) Approve the areas in which each operator is to work ; and
(5) The commission, in order to carry into effect the provisions of sections
2-2401 to 2-2409, is authorized and empowered: (a) To promulgate and enforce
such rules and regulations as may be deemed proper and necessary ; (b) to appoint
a qualified individual, organization, or institution to evaluate and publish the
effects of all operations conducted in the state, and employ such clerical help as
is necessary ; (c) to recommend to the department the revocation of licenses, for
cause, if, after holding hearing, they so determine; (d) to enter into any con-
tracts or memoranda of agreement as are necessary; and (e) to authorize the
department to expend such funds as may be made available to it.
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7, § 5, p. 102.
2-2406. Weather control; modification activities; license; issuance; expiration ;
revocation. (1) It shall be unlawful for any private person or persons, corpora-
tion, institution, or individual group to engage in activities for artificial weather
modification except under and in accordance with a license issued by the depart-
ment. The department shall issue such license only upon the recommendation of
the Weather Control Commission.
(2) Each such license shall expire on December 31 of each year and shall be
revocable at any time prior to such date by the department upon recommendation
of the commission, in accordance with such procedure as the commission may
establish.
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7, § 6, p. 103.
2-2'f0~i. Weather control; artificial precipitation; application; license; fees:
payment to State Treasurer; credited to General Fund.
(1) Any person desiring to cause, or attempting to cause, condensation of
precipitation of rain, snow, moisture, or water in any form contained in the at-
mosphere, or who shall prevent or attempt to prevent by artificial means the
natural condensation Or precipitation of rain, snow, moisture, or water in any
form contained in the atmosphere shall make application to the department in
writing, on forms supplied by the department, to do so. Each application shall be
accompanied by a fee of fifty dollars.
(2) Any person issued a license to do any of the acts specified in subsection
(1) of this section shall pay a fee of two hundred dollars.
(3) Xo fee shall be charged for experimental or research work.
(4) The money collected from such fees shall be deposited with the state
treasury and by the State Treasurer credited to the General Fund.
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7, § 7, p. 103 ; Laws 1965, c. 8, § 6, p. 91
2-21,08. Weather Control Commission.; cooperation with other agencies. The
commission shall cooperate with the federal government and its agents and
contractors, and with other states, in the conduct of artificial weather modifi-
cation operations.
Source : Laws 1957. c. 7, § 8, p. 104.
2-2Jf08. Weather Control Commission ; cooperation with other agencies. The
license; violation ; penalty. Any private person engaging in any type of artificial
weather modification without having first procured a license as required by
sections 2-2401 to 2-2409 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, upon con-
viction thereof, be fined not less than three hundred dollars nor more than eight
hundred dollars.
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7, § 9, p. 104.
(b) Weather Control Districts
2-2 'f 10 to 2-2 ',27. Repealed. Laws 1959. c. 9, § 24.
Weather Control Act of 1957 was unconstitutional as unlawful delegation of legislative
Powers. Sununerville v. North Platte Valley Weather Control Dist., 170 Neb. 46, 101 N W
2d 748.
560
2-2^28. Weather control districts; authorisation. Weather control districts
may be' formed in the manner, and having the power, provided in section 2-2428
to 2-2449.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 1, p. 107.
2-2429. Weather control districts; initiation; petition; signatures required.
Proceedings for the establishment of a weather control district may be initiated
only by the filing of a petition with the Department of Agriculture. The petition
shall be signed by not less than twelve resident owners of land in each of a major-
ity of the precincts lying wholly or partly within the proposed district.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 2, p. 107.
2-2430. Weather control districts; petition; contents. (1) The petition referred
to in section 2-2429 shall set forth :
(a) The proposed name of the district ;
(b) A description of the territory proposed to be included in the district,
together with the proposed boundaries of such district and the divisions
thereof for the purpose of election of directors ; a map showing such bounda-
ries ; and that property within the proposed district will be benefited by the
organization of such district ;
(c) A recommendation as to the number and terms of directors that the
district shall have if formed, together with the name, address, terms of office,
and division to be represented of each of the proposed directors, who shall
serve until their successors are elected and qualified, designating their
terms so that not more than one-third shall terminate every two years ;
(d) Where the offices of such proposed district are to be maintained; and
(e) A prayer that the organization of the district be submitted to a vote
of the electors who own taxable property except intangible property within
such district.
(2) No petition for the organization of a district under sections 2-2428 to
2-2449 with the requisite signatures shall be declared null and void on account
of minor defects, but the department may at any time, prior to final determination
of the sufficiency thereof, permit the petition to be amended in form and sub-
stance to conform to the facts. Several similar petitions or duplicate copies of the
same petition for the organization of the same district may be filed and shall
together be regarded as one petition. All petitions filed prior to the determination
of the sufficiency of such petition, shall be considered as though filed with the
first petition placed on file.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 3, p. 108.
2-2431. Weather control districts; examination of petition; order for hear-
ing; notice. The Department of Agriculture shall examine the petition and if
it finds that the same bears the requisite number of signatures and otherwise
meets the requirements of sections 2-2428 to 2-2449, it shall fix a time and place
for hearing upon such petition and cause notice thereof to be given to all per-
sons having any interest in the organization of the proposed district by pub-
lication in each of the counties lying wholly or partly within the proposed
district once each week for two consecutive weeks in a legal newspaper or news-
papers of general circulation in such counties. Such notice shall state (1) the
fact of filing of the petition; (2) in summary form, the information required by
subsection (1) of section 2-2430 to be included in the petition; (3) the purpose
of the formation of such proposed district; (4) the time and place of hearing
such petition; and (5) the purpose of such hearing. Such hearing shall be held
at such time and place as designated by the department, not less than twenty
days nor more than forty days after the filing of the petition.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 4, p. 109.
2-2432. Weather control districts; hearing; change of "boundaries. At the time
of the hearing, the Department of Agriculture shall receive any competent and
relevant evidence which may be produced by any person interested in the orga-
nization of such district in support of or against the petition. If the department
finds that the boundaries proposed by the petitioners should be changed, it shall
change the same and fix the boundaries where the same, in the judgment of the
department, should be fixed with a view to doing justice and equity to all per-
sons; Provided, that if the department deems it proper to include in the dis-
trict any territory not included in the boundaries proposed by the petitioners,
it shall first cause notice of its intention to do so to be mailed to each owner
of land within the territory proposed to be included. Such notice shall describe
the territory so proposed to be included in the proposed district and fix a time
561
and place, not less than one week nor more than three weeks from the date of
mailing thereof, when all persons interested may appear and be heard.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 5, p. 109.
2-2433. Weather control districts; hearing order; appeal. If the Department
of Agriculture determines that the organization of such district would be de-
sirable and necessary in the interest of the public welfare, it shall within ten
| days after the final hearing enter an order (1) approving the petition and
amendments thereto, if made; and (2) fixing the boundaries of the proposed
district and the divisions thereof for the purpose of election of directors, which
order shall be deemed a final order for purposes of review to the district court
on appeal. Any person owning taxable property, except intangible property,,
within the proposed district aggrieved by the order of the department approving
the petition or fixing the boundaries, may appeal from such order to the district
court of the comity wherein the office of the district is maintained. The proce-
dure for and upon such appeal shall be nearly as possible the same as is provided
for appeals from final orders on claims presented to the county board of such
county.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 6, p. 110.
2-2434. Weather control districts; Secretary of State; election; fix date. If
no appeal is taken from the order of the Department of Agriculture, or upon
final determination by the court, the department shall deliver to the Secretary
of State a copy of the order or orders of the department or court and the peti-
tions as approved by the department, along with a request that the question
of the organization of the district be submitted to a vote of the electors who own
taxable property, except intangible property, within such district as prayed for in
the petition. Upon receipt of such request, the Secretary of State shall fix the
date of such election, which may be held either as a special election or at any
general election. Such election shall be so scheduled that the notice required by
section 2-2435 can be given.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 7, p. 110.
2-2435. Weather control districts; notice to election commissioner or county
clerk; statement of question to be submitted. The Secretary of State shall give
notice of the scheduling of such election to the election commissioners, or county
clerks in those counties not having an election commissioner, of each county
to be embraced in whole or in part within such district. Such notice shall contain
a statement of the question to be submitted at such election, the area in which
such election is to be held, and the date thereof.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 8, p. 110.
2-2436. Weather control districts; election commissioner or county clerk ; notice
of election ; publication. The election commissioner or county clerk, whichever is
appropriate, shall publish a notice once each week, three consecutive weeks, in a
legal newspaper having general circulation in his county, which notice shall
state: (1) The fact of filing of the petition ; (2) in summary form, the informa-
tion required by subsection (1) of section 2-2430 to be included in the petition;
(3) that an election will be held to decide the question of organization of the
proposed district; (4) the date of such election ; (5) the polling places at which
such election is to be held; (6) a statement that all electors who own taxable
property, except intangible property, within such district shall be entitled to vote
at such election; and (7) the specific question to be submitted.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 9, p. 110.
2-2437. Weather control district; election; how conducted; certification of re-
sults; resubmission of question. The ballots cast at such election shall be counted
and canvassed as nearly as practicable in the same manner as for elections gen-
erally. Not later than one week after the holding of such election, the election
commissioners or county clerks, whichever is appropriate, shall certify the results
thereof to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State shall tabulate the re-
sults so certified to him, and if he finds fifty-five per cent of those voting in such
election voted in favor of the organization of the proposed district, he shall so
certify to the county clerk in each of the counties lying in whole or in part within
such district, and the district shall thereupon be fully organized ; Provided, that
if the ballots cast in any precinct, or part of a precinct when the entire precinct
is not included in the proposed district, in favor of the organization of the pro-
posed district are less than fifty-five per cent of the total ballots cast, then such
precinct or part thereof shall not be included in the proposed district. If the
proposition to form such district is defeated at the election, the proposition may
again be submitted after the lapse of one year from the rejection thereof upon
562
the filing of a new petition therefor. If the proposition to form a district is
approved by fifty-five per cent of those voting on the proposition as provided in
this section, then the Secretary of State shall annually submit the proposition to
electors of the district for three consecutive years as to whether the district shall
he continued or dissolved. If the electors vote to dissolve, the district shall be
dissolved as provided in section 2-2447.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9. § 10. p. 111.
2-24-38. Weather control district; body politic; sue and be sued; directors not
liable for debts. A district formed under the provisions of sections 2-2428 to 2-2449
shall be a body politic, and may sue and be sued in its own name, and no liability
shall result to its directors on account of debts or other obligations of the district.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9. § 11, p. 112.
2-24-39. "Weather control district; board of directors; oath; bond; vacancies.
Each member of the board of directors shall be a resident landowner in such dis-
trict. He shall take an oath of office, and shall give bond in the sum of five
thousand dollars conditioned that he shall faithfully perform the duties of direc-
tor and of such further office to which he may be elected in such district, and
shall account for all funds or property coming into his hands as such director or
other officer. The treasurer of the district shall also give a corporate surety bond
in an amount sufficient to cover all money coming into his possession or control.
Each such bond shall run to the district, be signed by a surety or sureties
approved by the Secretary of State and shall be filed and recorded in the office of
the Secretary of State. When such bond is so filed and approved, such person so
elected shall take and hold office until his successor is elected and qualified.
When a vacancy occurs on the board, such vacancy shall be filled by the remain-
ing members of the board.
Source : Laws 1959. c. 9. § 12. p. 112.
2-24 40- Weather control district; board of directors; election of successors ; no
filirirj fee required. As the terms of members of the board of directors expire, their
successors shall be elected in the manner provided for election of directors of
public power districts. No filing fee shall be required of candidates filing for the
office of director of a weather control district.
Source : Laws 1959. c. 9. § 13. p. 112.
2-2441- Weather control district; board of directors; no compensation ; ex-
penses. The members of the board of directors shall receive no compensation, but
shall be paid their actual expenses while engaged in the business of such district.
Source : Laws 1959. c. 9, § 14, p. 112.
2-2442. Weather control district ; officers; election; books; records; audit. The
board of directors shall annually elect a president, vice president, secretary,
treasurer, and such other officers as may be necessary. Such board shall hold
rotrular meetings in its office at least once each calendar quarter and such special
meetings as may be required for the proper transaction of business. Notice of all
meetings of the board must be published in a newspaper of general circulation in
ti e district not less than seven nor more than fourteen days prior to the holding
of such meeting, which notice shall state the time, date, and place thereof, and,
in case of a special meeting, the purpose thereof. The board shall cause to be kept
accurate minutes of its meetings and accurate records and books of account, con-
forming to approved methods of bookkeeping, clearly setting out and reflecting
the operation, management, and business of the district. Snch books and records
shall be kept at the offices of the district and shall be open to public inspection
during normal business hours. The board shall cause to be published at the close
of each regular or special meeting a brief statement of the proceedings thereof
in ;) newspaper of general circulation in the district. At the close of each year's
business, the board shall cause an audit of the books, records, and financial affairs
of the district to be made by a certified public accountant or firm of such account-
ants, who shall be selected by the board, and the report, of such audit shall be
kept on file at the district's office for inspection by any interested party.
Source : I aws 1059, c. 9. § 15. p. 112.
£—2448' Weather control district ; board o-f directors ; general povers. The board
of directors shall have authority to : (1) Maintain and equip an office, and employ
such persons as may be needed : (2) gather information concerning weather con-
trol : (3) aid or conduct, alone or in conjunction with other districts, any program
of weather control ; (4) contract with any private individual, association, or cor-
poration, or with any governmental acreney. engaged in weather control, for per-
formance of the activities mentined in subdivisions (2) and (3) of this section;
( 5 I disseminate, by publication, or by press, radio, or television release, or other-
563
wise, information concerning weather control; (6) participate in any federal
grant-in-aid program which has been or which might be established; and (7)
lew a tax as provided in section 2-2444.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 16, p. 113.
2-2JfU. Weather control district; taxes; levy; limit of levy; certification; col-
lection. The board of directors shall, prior to August 1 of each year, prepare an
estimate showing the amount of money required to finance the activities of the
district for the ensuing year and may levy and collect each year the taxes neces-
sary to finance the activities of such district for the ensuing year to the amount
of not more than one mill on the dollar of the assessed value of all taxable prop-
erty, except intangible property, within such district. It shall, on or before the
hist day of August in each year, certify its mill levy to the county clerks of the
counties wholly or partially within the district, who shall extend the same on
the county tax list, and the same shall be collected by the county treasurer in the
same manner as state and county taxes. It shall be the duty of the board to apply
for and to receive from the county treasurers all money to the credit of the dis-
trict. The county treasurers shall disburse the same to the order of the treasurer
of the district.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § IS. p. 113.
Z-2445, Weather control district; warrants; issuance; payment; registration ;
interest. All claims against weather control districts may be paid by warrants or
orders, duly drawn on the treasurer of such district, signed by the president and
countersigned by the secretary. When such warrants or orders have been issued
and delivered, they may be presented to the treasurer of the district, and if such
be the fact, endorsed Not paid for want of funds. Such warrants or orders shall
be registered by the treasurer in the order of presentation, shall draw interest at
the rate of seven per cent per annum from the date of registration thereof, and
shall be received by the county treasurers in payment of weather control district
taxes levied pursuant to section 2-2444.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 19, p. 114.
2-2J/J{6. Weather control district; program for ireather control ; contract ; seed-
ing outside of boundaries of district ; violation ; penalty. Tbe board of directors
shall not be required to conduct, or contract for. any program of weather control
for any year in which it does not appear that such program would be of substan-
tial benefit to the district. In the event any program of weather control is con-
ducted within any such weather control district organized under sections 2-2428
to 2-2449 it shall be unlawful for any aircraft of such district or its contractor
to fly outside the boundaries of such district during any seeding operations or to
seed any cloud formation situated outside the boundaries of such district. Any
person, partnership, association, or corporation violating the provisions of this
section shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined in any sum not to exceed five
thousand dollars.
Source : Laws 1959. c. 9. § 20, p. 114.
2-2JtJtl. Weather control district; dissolution of district; election; how con-
ducted; disposal of funds: debts; tax; levy. The board of directors may, on its
own motion, or the board shall, on a written request signed by not less than
twelve resident owners of land in each of a majority of the precincts lying wholly
or partly within the district, request of the Secretary of State that the question
of dissolution of such district be submitted to a vote of the electors, as set forth in
sections 2-2428 to 2-2449. of the district, and the Secretary of State shall fix
the date of such election, notice of which shall be given and which shall be con-
ducted in the same manner as elections for the formation of such districts. If a
majority of those voting on such question vote in favor of dissolution, the Secre-
tary of State shall certify such result to the board of directors of such district. If
the district has no debts outstanding at the time such result is certified to the
board by the Secretary of State, such district shall thereupon stand dissolved.
If the district has debts outsanding at the time such result is certified to the
board by the Secretary of State and there are not sufficient funds in the hands of
the treasurer of the district or in the hands of the county treasurer or treasurers
to the credit of the district, to pay such debts, or if at the time of such certifica-
tion, the district is under contract for any program of weather control as autho-
rized herein, the board of directors of such district shall have authority to: (1)
Levy the taxes necessary to pay such outstanding debts ; (2) complete, in accord-
ance with the contract, any program of weather control, or in the alternative, to
negotiate and enter into a settlement of such contract with the contractor or con-
tractors ; (3) levy the taxes necessary to pay any obligations due or to become due
564
under any such contract for any such program of weather control or to pay the
cost of settlement thereof; and (4) wind up the affairs of the district and levy
the taxes necessary to pay the cost thereof, and upon payment of such debts,
the completion or settlement of such contract or contracts for any such program
of weather control and the payment of the obligations due under any such con-
tract or the settlement thereof, and the payment of the costs incurred in winding
up the affairs of the district, the district shall thereupon stand dissolved. In
case a district is dissolved, any funds on hand or to be collected, in excess of the
funds necessary to pay the outstanding obligations of the district and the costs
of winding up the affairs of the district, shall be held by the treasurer of the dis-
trict, and the directors shall petition the district court of the county in which
the main office is located for an order approving the distribution of funds to the
taxpayers of the district on the same basis as collected. The question of dissolu-
tion shall not be submitted more often than once every twelve months.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 21, p. 114.
2-2448. Weather control district; act, how cited. Sections 2-2428 to 2-2449 may
be cited as the Weather Control Act of Nebraska.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9, § 22, p. 116.
2-2449. Weather control district; formed under prior act; validation. In all
cases in which weather control districts were established in accordance with laws
heretofore existing, all acts and proceedings taken for the purpose of creating
such district are hereby legalized, validated, and declared to be sufficient, and
such weather control district is hereby declared to be duly incorporated, and as
such, said weather control district under its corporate name shall have all the
rights and privileges and be subject to all of the duties and obligations of a duly
incorporated weather control district.
Source : Laws 1959, c. 9 § 23, p. 116.
Article 24 — Weather Modification Commission
(a) Weather Modification Commission
Sec.
2-2404. Weather Modification Commission ; created ; membership ; appointment ; term ;
no salary ; expenses.
2-2407. Weather control ; artificial precipitation ; application ; license : fees : payment
to State Treasurer ; credited to special funds and accounts.
2-2408.01. Department of Agriculture ; authority to accept funds ; purpose.
2-2408.02. State Treasurer ; custodian of weather modification funds or accounts ; duties ;
investment.
(a) Weather Modification Commission
2-2404. Weather Modification Commission; created; memdership; appoint-
ment; term; no salary; expenses. There is hereby established a Weather Modifi-
cation Commission, composed of the Director of Agriculture, the Vice Chancellor
of the Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources of the University of Ne-
braska or his representative, the chairman of the physics department of the Uni-
versity of Nebraska, and four additional members, interested in weather modifi-
cation, who shall be appointed annually by the Governor for a one-year term
commencing January 1. The members of the commission shall serve without
salary, but shall be reimbursed for their actual and necessary expenses while
in the performance of their duties.
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7, § 4, p. 102 ; Laws 1975, LB 247, § 1. Effective date
August 24 1975.
2-2407. Weather control; artificial precipitation; application; license; fees;
payment to State Treasurer; credited to special funds and accounts. (1) Any
person desiring to cause or attempting to cause, condensation or precipitation of
rain, snow, moisture, or water in any form contained in the atmosphere, or who
shall prevent or attempt to prevent by artificial means the natural condensation
or precipitation of rain, snow, moisture, or water in any form contained in the
atmosphere, shall make application to the department in writing, on forms sup-
plied by the department, to do so. Each application shall be accompanied by a fee
of fifty dollars.
(2) Any person issued a license to do any of the acts specified in subsection
(1) of t his section shall pay a fee of two hundred dollars.
(3) No fee shall be cha rged for experimental or research work.
(4) The money collected from such fees shall be deposited with the state treas-
ury and by the State Treasurer credited to the special funds and accounts estab-
lished by section 2-2408.02.
565
Source : Laws 1957, c. 7, § 7, p. 103 ; Laws 1965, c. 8, § 6, p. 91 ; Laws 1975 LB 247,
§ 2. Effective date August 24, 1975.
2-2408.01. Department of Agriculture; authority to accept funds; purpose. The
department may accept funds or fees from any source, federal, state, public or
private, to be used by the commission in the performance of its duties.
Source : Laws 1975, LB 247, § 3. Effective date August 24, 1975.
2-2408.02. State Treasurer; custodian of weather modification funds or ac-
counts; duties; investment. The State Treasurer is hereby designated as the cus-
todian of all funds or fees received by the department from any source, federal,
state, public or private, to be used by the commission in the performance of its
duties. The State Treasurer is authorized to receive and provide for the proper
custody of such funds or fees and establish such special weather modification
funds and accounts as may be necessary to carry out the intent and purposes of
sections 2-2404 2-2407, 2-2408.01, and 2-2408.02. The Director of Administrative
Services shall draw warrants upon such funds or accounts upon presentation of
proper vouchers by the department. Any money in the special weather modifica-
tion funds or accounts available for investment shall be invested by the state in-
vestment officer pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 72, article 12.
Source : Laws 1975. LB 247, § 4. Effective date August 24, 1975.
81-82945. State Civil Defense Agency; weather condition; continuously ap-
prise; permits; issue; suspend. The state Civil Defense Agency shall keep con-
tinuously apprised of weather conditions which present danger of precipitation
or other climatic activity severe enough to constitute a disaster. If the agency
determines that precipitation that may result from weather modification opera-
tions, either by itself or in conjunction with other precipitation or climatic con-
ditions or activity, would create or contribute to the severity of a disaster, it shall
direct the officer or agency empowered to issue permits for weather modification
operations to suspend the issuance of the permits, and thereupon no permits may
be issued until the agency informs the officer or agency that the danger has
passed.
Source : Laws 1973, LB 494, § 10. Effective date May 12, 1973.
Nevada
Nev. Rev. Stat. §§544.010-544.240; 244.190
Chapter 544 — Weather Modification
Weather Modification Research Law
Sec.
544.010 Short title.
544.020 Definitions.
544.030 State department of conservation and natural resources authorized to conduct
research programs.
544.040 County financial participation in research : conditions.
544.050 Agreements between counties and state department of conservation and natural
resources ; term of agreements.
544.060 Utilization of facilities, technical resources of desert research institute, Univer-
sity of Nevada System.
Regulations of Weather Modification Operations
544.070 Definitions.
544.080 Powers of the director of the state department of conservation and natural
resources.
544.090 Promotion of research and development activities relating to weather modification.
544.100 Hearings : Record of proceedings ; examination of witnesses ; subpenas.
544.110 Acceptance of gifts and grants ; weather modification fund.
544.120 License and.permit required for weather modification and control activities.
544.130 Exemptions from license, permit and liability requirements.
544.140 Qualifications of licensees ; issuance, renewal of licenses ; license fee.
544.150 Conditions for issuance of permits.
544.160 Separate permit required for each operation ; notice of intention ; conditions,
modification of permit.
544.170 Notice of intention : Contents.
544. ISO Notice of intention : Publication ; filing of proof of publication.
544.190 Proof of financial responsibility.
544.200 Permit fees.
544.210 Records and reports of licensees, exempt organizations.
544.220 Suspension, revocation of licenses and permits : Grounds ; modification of permit
terms.
544.230 Construction of NRS 544.070 to 544.240, inclusive.
544.240 Penalties.
Weather Modification Research Law
5U.010 Short title. NRS 544.010 to 544.060, inclusive, may be cited as the
Weather Modification Research Law.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 668)
566
544-020 Definitions. As used in NRS 544.010 to 544.060, inclusive, unless the
context otherwise requires :
1. "Department" means the state department of conservation and natural
resources.
2. "Director" means the director of the state department of conservation and
natural resources.
(Added to NRS by 3981, 668)
544-030 State department of conservation and natural resources authorized to
conduct research programs. The department may conduct weather modification
research programs.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 668)
544-040 County financial participation in research; conditions. In areas where
weather modification research is to be carried on, the counties involved may give
such financial assistance as the director and the board of county commissioners
shall determine, but such financial assistance shall aggregate for the counties
involved an amount not less than 25 percent of the amount paid by the state for
such program.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 668)
544.050 Agreements between counties and state department of conservation
and natural resources ; term of agreements. Counties in cooperating with the
director in conducting any weather modification program in fulfillment of the
purposes of NRS 544.010 to 544.060, inclusive, are authorized to enter into 5-year
agreements with the director.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 669 ; A 1975, 576)
544.060 Utilization of facilities, technical resources of desert research institute,
University of Nevada System. In carrying out the purposes of NRS 544.010 to
544.060, inclusive, the director shall utilize to the fullest possible extent the
facilities and technical resources of the desert research institute of the Univer-
sity of Nevada System.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 669 ; A 1969, 1443)
Regulations of Weather Modification Operations
544-070 Definitions. As used in NRS 544.070 to 544.240, inclusive, unless the
context requires otherwise :
1. "Director" means the director of the state department of conservation and
natural resources.
2. "Operation" means the performance of weather modification and control
activities pursuant to a single contract entered into for the purpose of producing,
or attempting to produce, a certain modifying effect within one geographical
area over one continuing time interval not exceeding 1 year, or, if the perform-
ance of weather modification and control activities is to be undertaken individ-
ually or jointly by a person or persons to be benefited and not undertaken pur-
suant to a contract, "operation" means the performance of weather modification
and control ac tivities entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempting to
produce, a certain modifying effect within one geographical area over one
continuing time interval not exceeding 1 year.
3. "Research and development" means theoretical analysis, exploration and
experimentation and the extension of investigative findings and theories of a
scientific or technical nature into practical application for experimental and
demonstration purposes, including the experimental production and testing of
models, devices, equipment, materials and processes.
4. "Wheather modification and control" means changing or controlling, or
attempting to change or control, by artificial methods the natural development
of any or all atmospheric cloud forms or precipitation forms which occur in
the troposphere.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 691 )
5',',. 0R0 Povcrs of the director of the state department of conservation and
natural resources. In the performance of his functions the director may, in addi-
tion to any other acts authorized by law :
1. Establish advisory committees to advise with and make recommendations
to the director concerning legislation, policies, administration, research and other
matters.
2. Establish by regulation or order such standards and instructions to govern
the carrying out of research or projects in weather modification and control as
he may deem necessary or desirable to minimize danger to health or property,
567
and make such regulations as are necessary in the performance of his powers
and duties.
3. Make such studies, investigations, obtain such information and hold such
hearings as he may deem necessary or proper to assist him in exercising his
authority or in the administration or enforcement of NRS 544.070 to 544.240,
inclusive, or any regulations or orders issued thereunder.
4. Appoint and lix the compensation of such personnel, without compliance
with the provisions of chapter 284 of NRS, including specialists and consultants,
as are necessary to perform his duties and functions.
5. Acquire, in the manner provided by law, such materials, equipment and
facilities as are necessary to perform his duties and functions.
6. Cooperate with public or private agencies in the performance of his func-
tions or duties and in furtherance of the purposes of NRS 544.070 to 544.240,
inclusive.
7. Represent the state in any and all matters pertaining to plans, procedures
or negotiations for interstate compacts relating to weather modification and
control.
8. With approval of the governor, enter into cooperative agreements with the
various counties and cities of this state or with any private or public agencies
for conducting weather modification or cloud seeding operations.
9. Act for and represent the state and the counties, cities and private or public
agencies in contracting with private concerns for the performance of weather
modifications or cloud seeding operations.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 692)
544-090 Promotion of research and development activities relating to iceathcr
modification. The director shall exercise his powers in such manner as to pro-
mote the continued conduct of research and deevlopment activities in the fields
specified below by private or public institutions or persons and to assist in the
acquisition of an expanding fund of theoretical and practical knowledge in such
fields. To this end the director may conduct, and make arrangements including
contracts and agreements for the conduct of, research and development activ-
ities relating to :
1. The theory and development of methods of weather modification and con-
trol, including processes, materials and devices related thereto.
2. Utilization of weather modification and control for agricultural, industrial,
commercial and other purposes.
3. The protection of life and property during research and operational
activities.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 693)
544-100 Hearings: Record of proceedings; examination of witnesses; sub-
pcttas. In the case of hearings held pursuant to NRS 544.220, the director shall,
and in other cases may, cause a record of all proceedings to be taken and filed
with the director, together with his findings and conclusions. For any hearing,
the director or a representative designated by him is authorized to administer
oaths and affirmations, examine witnesses and issue, in the name of the director,
notice of the hearing or subpenas requiring any person to appear and testify,
or to appear and produce documents, or both, at any designated place.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 693)
544110 Acceptance of gifts and grants ; weather modification fund.
1. The director may, subject to any limitations otherwise imposed by law, re-
ceive and accept for and in the name of the state any funds which may be offered
or become available from federal grants or appropriations, private gifts, dona-
tions or bequests, or from any other source, and may expend such funds, unless
their use is restricted and subject to any limitations otherwise provided by law,
for the administration of NRS 544.070 to 544.240, inclusive, and for the en-
couragement of research and development by a state or public or private agency,
either by direct grant, by contract or other cooperative means.
2. There is hereby established a continuing fund in the general fund in the
state treasury to be known as the weather modification fund. All license and
permit fees paid to the director shall be deposited in such fund. Any accumula-
tion in such fund in excess of $5,000 shall revert immediately to the general
fund.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 693)
544-120 License and permit required for weather modification and control
activities. Except as provided in NRS 544.130, no person shall engage in activ-
568
ities for weather modification and control except under and in accordance with
a license 'and a permit issued by the director authorizing such activities.
(Add to NRS by 1961, 693)
5JfJf.l30 Exemptions from license, permit and liability requirements. The
director, to the extent he deems practical, shall provide by regulation for exempt-
ing from the license, permit and liability requirements of NRS 544.070 to 544.240,
inclusive :
1. Research and development and experiments by state and federal agencies,
institutions of higher learning and bona fide nonprofit research organizations.
2. Laboratory research and experiments.
3. Activities required in emergencies for protection against fire, frost, sleet
or fog.
4. Activities normally engaged in for purposes other than those of inducing,
increasing, decreasing or preventing precipitation or hail.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 693 ; A 1967, 159)
5^.1JfO Qualifications of licensees; issuance, renewal of licenses; license fee.
1. Licenses to engage in activities for weather modification and control shall be
issued to applicants therefor who pay the license fee required and who demon-
strate, to the satisfaction of the director, competence in the field of meteorology
reasonably necessary to engage in activities for weather modification and con-
trol. If the applicant is an organization, these requirements shall be met by the
individual or individuals who are to be in control and in charge of the operation
for the applicant.
2. The director shall issue licenses in accordance with such procedures and
subject to such conditions as he may by regulation establish to effectuate the
provisions of NRS 544.070 to 544.240, inclusive. Each license shall be issued
for a period to expire at the end of the calendar year in which it is issued and,
if the licensee possesses the qualifications necessary for the issuance of a new
license, such license shall upon application be renewed at the expiration of such
period. A license shall be issued or renewed only upon the payment to the direc-
tor of $100 for the license or renewal thereof.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 694)
o'f-'{.150. Conditions for issuance of permits. The director shall issue permits
in accordance with such procedures and subject to such conditions as he may
by regulation establish to effectuate the provisions of NRS 544.070 to 544.240,
inclusive, only :
1. If the applicant is licensed pursuant to NRS 544.070 to 544.240, inclusive.
2. If a sufficient notice of intention is published and proof of publication is
filed as required by NRS 544.180.
3. If the applicant furnishes proof of financial responsibility, as provided in
NRS 544.190, in an amount as may be determined by the director but not to
exceed $20,000.
4. If the fee for a permit is paid as required by NRS 544.200.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 694)
5M.160. Separate permit required for each operation; notice of intention; con-
dition, modification of permit. A separate permit shall be issued for each opera-
tion. Prior to undertaking any weather modification and control activities the
licensee shall file with the director and also cause to be published a notice of
intention. The licensee, if a permit is issued, shall confine his activities for the
permitted operation substantially within the time and area limits set forth in
the notice of intention, unless modified by the director, and his activities shall
also substantially conform to any conditions imposed by the director upon the
issuance of the permit or to the terms of the permit as modified after issuance.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 694)
.-,',',.170. — Notice of intention: Contents. The notice of intention shall set forth
at least all the following :
1. The name and address of the licensee.
2. The nature and object of the intended operation and the person or orga-
nization on whose behalf it is to be conducted.
3. The area in which and the approximate time during which the opera-
tion will be conducted.
4. The area which is intended to be affected by the operation.
5. The materials and methods to be used in conducting the operation.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 694)
5 '/ ',.180. Notice of intention: Publication; filing of proof of publication. 1. The
applicant shall cause the notice of intention, or that portion thereof including
569
the items specified in NRS 544.170, to be published at least once a week for 3
consecutive weeks in a newspaper having a general circulation and published
within any county in which the operation is to be conducted and in which the
affected area is located, or, if the operation is to be conducted in more than one
county or if the affected area is located in more than one county or is located
in a county other than the one in which the operation is to be conducted, then
in a newspaper having a general circulation and published within each of such
counties. In case there is no newspaper published within the appropriate county,
publication shall be made in a newspaper having a general circulation within
the county.
2. Proof of publication, made in the manner provided by law, shall be filed by
the Licensee with the director within 15 days from the date of the last publication
of the notice.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 695)
544-190 Proof of financial responsibility. Proof of financial responsibility may
be furnished by an applicant by his showing, to the satisfaction of the director,
his ability to respond in damages for liability which might reasonably be at-
tached to or result from his weather modification and control activities in con-
nection with the operation for which he seeks a permit ; but the applicant need
not show ability to respond in damages for liability resulting from precipitation
caused by weather modification experiments.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 695 ; A 1967, 159)
544-200 Permit fees. The fee to be paid by each applicant for a permit shall
be equivalent to l1^ percent of the estimated cost of such operation, such cost
to be estimated by the director from the evidence available to him. The fee is
due and payable to the director as of the date of the issuance of the permit, but
if the applicant is able to give to the director satisfactory security for the pay-
ment of the balance, he may be permitted to commence the operation, and a
permit may be issued therefor, upon the payment of not less than 50 percent
of the fee. The balance due shall be paid within 3 months from the date of the
termination of the operation as prescribed in the permit. Failure to pay a permit
fee as required is grounds for suspension or revocation of the license of the
delinquent permitholder and grounds for refusal to renew his license or to issue
any further permits to such person.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 695)
544-210 Records and reports of licensees, exempt organizations. 1. Each li-
censee shall keep and maintain a record of all operations conducted by him pursu-
ant to his license and each permit, showing the method employed, the type of
equipment used, materials and amounts thereof used, the times and places of oper-
ation of the equipment, the name and post office address of each individual par-
ticipating or assisting in the operation other than the licensee, and such other
general information as may be required by the director, and shall report the
same to the director at the time and in the manner required by the director.
2. The director shall require written reports in such manner as he provides
but not inconsistent with the provisions of NRS 544.070 to 544.240, inclusive,
covering each operation for which a permit is issued. The director shall also
require written reports from such organizations as are exempt from the license,
permit and liability provisions of NRS 544.130.
3. All information on an operation shall be submitted to the director before
any information on such operation may be released to the public.
4. The reports and records in the custody of the director shall be open for
public examination.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 695)
544-220 Suspension, revocation of licenses and permits: Grounds; modification
of permit terms. 1. The director may suspend or revoke any license or permit
issued if it appears that the licensee no longer possesses the qualifications neces-
sary for the issuance of a new license or permit. The director may suspend or
revoke any license or permit if it appears that the licensee has violated any of
the provisions of NRS 544.070 to 544.240, inclusive. Such suspension or revoca-
tion shall occur only after notice to the licensee and a reasonable opportunity
granted such licensee to be heard respecting the grounds for the proposed sus-
pension or revocation. The director may refuse to renew the license of, or to
issue another permit to, any applicant who has failed to comply with any pro-
visions of NRS 544.070 to 544.240, inclusive.
2. The director may modify the terms of a permit after issuance thereof if
the licensee is first given notice and a reasonable opportunity for a hearing
570
respecting the grounds for the proposed modification and if it appears fo the
director, that it is necessary for the protection of the health or the property of
any person to make the modification proposed.
(Added to NRS by 1961, 696)
■ 5.',Jh230 Construction of NRS 5Jf'h070 to 5U.2IfO, inclusive. Nothing in NRS
544.070 to 54 4. 240, inclusive, shall be construed to impose or accept any liability
or responsibility on the part of the state or any state officials or employees for
any weather modification and control activities of any private person or group,
or to affect in any way any contractual, tortious or other legal rights, duties or
liabilities between any private persons or groups.
' Added to NRS by 1961. 696)
544.240 Penalties. Any person violating any of the provisions of NRS 544.070
to 544.2-JO. inclusive, or any lawful regulation or order issued pursuant thereto
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and a continuing violation is punishable as a
separate offense for each dav during which it occurs.
( Added to NRS by 1961. 696)
244-181 Franchises for garbage collection, disposal services; fire protection,
suppression : ambulance service. 1. Any board of county commissioners may grant
exclusive franchises to operate any of the following services outside the limits
of incorporated cities within the county :
I a ) Garbage and disposal.
(b) Fire protection and suppression.
(c) Ambulance service to pick up patients outside the limits of such incorpo-
rated cities.
2. Nothing in paragraph (c) of subsection 1 shall prevent any ambulance
service from transporting patients from any county in which it is franchisee!
to another county.
3. The board of county commissioners may, by ordinance, regulate such services
and fix fees or rates to be charged by the franchise holder.
4. A notice of the intention to grant any franchise shall be published once in a
newspaper of general circulation in the county, and the franchise may not be
granted until 30 days after such publication. The board of county commissioners
shall give full consideration to any application or bid to supply such services, if
received prior to the expiration of such 30-day period, and shall grant the fran-
chise on terms most advantageous to the county and the persons to be served.
5. The provisions of chapter 709 of NRS shall not apply to any franchise granted
under the provisions of this section.
ti. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent any individual, partner-
ship, corporation or association from hauling his or its own garbage subject to
the regulations of the board of county commissioners promulgated under the pro-
visions of this section.
1 Added to NRS by 1960. 433 : A 1971, 1372 ; 1975, 569)
.J 'j'f.190 Weather modification cooperative agreements. 1. The boards of county
commissioners of the various counties are empowered to enter into cooperative
agreements with the State of Nevada, other counties of this state, or any private
or public organization, and with private concerns engaged in weather modification
(cloud seeding) operations.
2. The expenses incident and necessary for the participation of counties in such
cooperative program, as provided in subsection 1, shall be paid out of the general
funds of such counties, and the board of county commissioners of any county act-
ing under the terms of this section shall annually, at the time of making its
budget, make an estimate of the expenses necessary to carry out its agreement,
under the provisions of this section, and budget the same, in all respects, as other
items of the budget may be made.
3. All agreements for cooperation between the State of Nevada and the counties,
and with any private organization as set forth in subsection 1, shall be evidenced
bv written agreements made and entered into by the boards of county commis-
sioners interested, and the same shall be spread upon the minutes of each of the
boards at the time of the adoption thereof.
4. All action taken and all proceedings adopted prior to March 2, 1955, by the
boards of county commissioners of Pershing, Lander, Eureka, Humboldt. Elko
and While Pine counties, relating to weather modification (cloud seeding), are
ratified, approved and confirmed.
[ 1 :26 :1955]-K2 :2G :1955] + [3 :26 :1955] + [4 :26 :1955]
%44'Wh VQtyng machines: Rental, lease, acquisition. Boards of county commis-
571
sioners may rent, lease or otherwise acquire voting machines in whatever manner
will best serve local interests.
(Added to NRS by 1965, 615 ; A 1975, 570)
244.195 Other powers. The boards of county commissioners shall have power
and jurisdiction in their respective counties to do and perform all such other acts
and things as may be lawful and strictly necessary to the full discharge of the
powers and jurisdiction conferred on the board.
[Part 8 :80 :1865 ; A 1871, 47 ; 1931, 52 ; 1933, 203 ; 1953, 681]
New Hampshire
NJL Rev. Stat. Ann. §432:1
Weather Modification Experimentation
432:1 Weather Modification Experimentation. Any department or agency of the
state may, with the approval of the governor and council and within the limits of
appropriated funds or by means of gifts, donations or grants, engage in and under-
take experimentation in the techniques and methods for weather modification,
and may cooperate therein with the federal government, with authorized agencies
of other states, and with interested persons and organizations.
New Mexico
N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 75-37-1-75-31-15
Article 37 — Weather Control and Cloud Modification
Sec.
75-37-1. Short title.
73-37-2. Definitions.
75-37-3. Declaration of rights.
75-37-4. Attempt to control precipitation — License required.
75-37-5. Application for license.
75-37-6. Application for license — Contents — Annual license fee — Statement.
75-37-7. Issuance of license.
75—37—8. License fee — Expiration.
75-37-9. Reports required from licensees.
75-37-10. Revocation of license.
75-37—11. Judicial review.
75-37-12. Operations affecting weather in other states.
75-37-13. Enforcement.
75-37-14. Powers and duties of commission.
75-37-15. Violations of act — Penalty.
75-37-1. Short title.— This act [75-37-1 to 75-37-15] may be cited as the "Wea-
ther Control Act."
75-37-2. Definitions. — As used in the Weather Control Act [75-37-1 to 75-37-
15] "commission" means the weather control and cloud modification commission.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 2.
75-37-3. Declaration of rights. — It is declared that the state of New Mexico
claims the right to all moisture in the atmosphere which would fall so as to be-
come a part of the natural streams or percolated water of New Mexico, for use
in accordance with its laws.
75-37-4. Attempt to control precipitation — License required. — No person or cor-
poration shall, without having first received a license from the commission, con-
duct any weather control or cloud modification operations or attempt to control
precipitation.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 4.
75-37-5. Application for license. — Any individual or corporation who proposes
to operate weather control or cloud modification projects or who attempts to induce
precipitation, shall, before engaging in any such operation, make application to
the commission for a license to engage in the particular weather control or cloud
modification operation contemplated.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 5.
75-37-6. Application for license — Contents — Annual license fee — Statement. —
At the time of applying for the license, the applicant shall pay to the commission a
fee of one hundred dollars ($100), and shall file an application in the form pre-
scribed by the commission which shall be accompanied by a statement showing:
A. The name and address of the applicant ;
B. The names of the operating personnel, and, if unincorporated, all individ-
uals connected with the organization, or, if a corporation, the names of each of the
officers and directors thereof, together with the address of each :
C. The scientific qualifications of all operating and supervising personnel ;
572
T>. A statement of all other contracts completed or in process of completion at
the time the application is made, giving the names and addresses of the persons
to whom the services were furnished and the areas in which such operations have
been or are being conducted ;
E. The objective of the operation, methods of operation the licensee will use,
and the description of the aircraft, ground and meteorological services to be used ;
!F. Names of the contracting parties within the state ; including :
(1) the area to be served ;
'(2) the months in which operations will be conducted ;
(3) the methods to be used in evaluating the operation ; and
G. Any other information the commission deems necessary.
'History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 6.
75-37-7. Issuance of license. — The commission may issue a license to any
applicant who demonstrates sufficient financial responsibility, to the satisfaction
of the board, necessary to meet obligations reasonably likely to be attached to or
result from weather control or cloud modification activities, and skill and ex-
perience reasonably necessary to accomplishment of weather control without
actionable injury to property or person.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 7.
15-31-S. License fee — Expiration. — A license shall expire at the end of the
calendar year in which it is issued and may be renewed upon payment of the
annual license fee.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 8.
15-31-9. Reports required from licenses. — lEach licensee shall, within ninety
[90] days after conclusion of any weather control or cloud modification project,
file with the commission a final evaluation of the project. Each three [3] months,
during the operation of any project which has not been completed, each licensee
shall file a report evaluating the operations for the preceding three [3] months in
the project. Failure to file such reports constitute [s] grounds for immediate revo-
cation of the license. Each evaluation report shall contain such information as
required by the commission in order to aid in research and development in weather
modification and to aid in the protection of life and property.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 9.
15-31-10. Revocaton of license. — The commission shall revoke any license if
it shall appear that the licensee no longer possesses the qualifications necessary
for the issuance of a new license, or is guilty of a violation of any of the pro-
visions of the Weather Control Act [75-37-1 to 75-37-15]. Such revocation shall
occur only after notice to the licensee, and a reasonable opportunity has been
granted the licensee to be heard respecting the grounds of the proposed revocation.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 10.
15-31-11. Judicial review. — Rulings by the commission on the issuance, re-
fusal or revocation of a license are subject to review only in the district court
for Santa Fe Countv and the state Supreme Court.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 11.
15-31-12. Operations affecting weather in other states. — Weather control or
cloud modification operations may not be carried on in New Mexico for the pur-
pose of affecting weather in any other state which prohibits such operations, or
which prohibits operations in that state for the benefit of New Mexico or its in-
habitants.
iHistory : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 12.
15-31-13. Enforcement. — Enforcement of the Weather Control Act T 75-37-1
to 75-37-15] is vested in the board of regents of New Mexico Institute of Mining
and Technology. The board of regents shall appoint a three-member weather con-
trol and cloud modification commission for the purpose of administering the pro-
visions of the Weather Control Act. Technical assistance, research, evaluation,
and advice to the commission shall be furnished by the institute at the direction
of the board of rodents. The commission shall elect from among its members a
chairman and other officers it dooms nooessnry. All fees collected by the commis-
sion shall be placed in a fund to be used by the commission for the purposes of
ca rrving out the provisions of the Weather Control Act.
History : Laws 1965. ch. 235. § 13.
7.r>~31-1/t. Powers and duties of commission. — The commision may:
A. Make nil rules and regulations necessary to carry out the provisions of the
Weather Control Act T75-37-1 to 75-37-15] ;
B. Make any Held investigations and inspections necessary to the enforcement
of the Weather Control Act ;
573
C. Make periodic reports on weather control and cloud modification activities
in this state together with evaluations of the results of such activities ; and
D. Make recommendations to the legislature through the board of regent* on
needed legislation in the regard to weather control and cloud modification.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 14.
75-37-15. Violations of act — Penalty. — Any person conducting weather con-
trol or cloud modification operations without first having procured a license, or
who makes a false statement in the application for a license, or who fails to file
any report or evaluation required by the Weather Control Act [75-37-1 to 75-37-
15], or who conducts any weather control or cloud modification operation after
revocation of his license, or who violates any provision of the Weather Control Act
is guilty of a misdemeanor.
History : Laws 1965, ch. 235, § 15.
New York
N.Y. Gen. Mun. Law Law § 119-p
Article 5-H — Projects Relating to the Use of Atmospheric Water Resources-
[New]
See.
119 — p. Projects relating to the use of atmospheric water resources.
Article added L.1965, c. 661, eff. July 2, 1965.
§ 119-p. Projects relating to the use of atmospheric water resources
Every municipal corporation is, and any two or more municipal corporations
are, hereby authorized and empowered to conduct or engage in projects, experi-
ments and other activities designed to develop the use of atmospheric water re-
sources, and to make scientific evaluations of such projects, experiments and
other activities, or to contract therefor, and to appropriate and expend moneys
therefor. In the case of a joint project by two or more municipal corporations,
the share of the cost of such project or activity to be borne by each such munic-
ipal corporation shall be fixed by contract. The expenditure of moneys for such
purpose by a municipal corporation shall be deemed a lawful municipal purpose
and the moneys appropriated therefor shall be raised by tax upon the taxable real
property within the municipal corporation in the same manner as moneys for
other lawful municipal purposes. Each municipal corporation is hereby author-
ized to accept and disburse grants of public or private money or other aid paid
or made available by the state or federal government for any such purpose.
Added L.1965, c. 661, eff. July 2, 1965.
North Dakota
N.D. Cent. Code §§ 2-07-01—2-07-13; 37-17.1-15; 58-03-07
Chapter 2-07 — Weather Modification
Sec.
2-07-01 Ownership of water
2-07-01.1 Declaration of policy and purpose.
2-07-02 Definitions.
2-07-02.1 North Dakota weather modification board — Created — Membership.
2-97-02.2 Weather modification board — Districts created.
2-07-02.3 Direction and supervision by aeronautics commission — Independent functions
retained by board.
2-07-02.4 Weather modification board — Officers — Compensation.
2-07-02.5 Powers and duties of weather modification board.
2-07-03 License and permit required.
2-07-03.1 Exemptions.
2-07-03.2 Operator deemed to be doing business within state — Resident agent.
2-07-03.3 Issuance of license — Fee.
2—07—03.4 Revocation or suspension of license.
2-07-04 Permit required — Issuance of permit — Fee.
2-07-04.1 Hearings.
2-07-04.2 Revocation, suspension, or modification of permit.
2^07-04.3 Proof of financial responsibility.
2-07-05 Board may create operating districts — Representation of noncontracting
counties.
2-07-05.1 District operations advisory committees created — Duties.
2t-07-05.2 Weather modification authority may suspend operations.
2-07-06 Weather modification authority created by petition.
2-07-06.1 Petition contents.
34-857—79 39
574
Sec.
2-07-06.2 Commissioners — Compensation — Meetings — Officers.
2-07-06.3 Tax levy may be certified by weather modification authority.
2-07-06.4: Creation of weather modification authority and its powers by resolution.
2-07-06.5 Procedure for abolishment of weather modification authority and all its powers
by recall initiated petition.
2-07-06.6 Creation of weather modification authority by election.
2 07-06.7 Abolishment of weather modification authority by election.
2-07-06.8 Creation of weather modification authority by vote after resolution of county
commissioners.
2-07-07 County budget may be waived for first appropriation — Conditions.
2-07-08 Bids required — When.
2-07-09 Performance bond required.
2-07-09.1 Bid bond required.
2-07-10 State immunity.
2-07-10.1 Liability of controller.
2-07-11 Weather modification board may receive and expend funds.
2-07-11.1 County appropriations — State to provide matching funds.
2 07-12 Aeronautics commission — Compensation — Expenses.
2-07-13 Penalty.
5S-03-07. Powers of electors. — The electors of each township have the power
at the annual township meeting:
1. To establish one or more pounds within the township, to determine the lo-
cation of the pounds, to determine the number of poundmasters and to choose
the poundmasters, and to discontinue pounds which have been established ;
2. To select the township officers required to be chosen ;
3. To direct the institution or defense of actions in all controversies where the
township is interested ;
4. To direct the raising of such sums of as they may deem necessary to prose-
cute or defend actions in which the township is interested ;
5. To make all rules and regulations for the impounding of animals ;
6. To make such bylaws, rules, and regulations as may be deemed necessary
to carry into effect the powers granted to the township ;
7. To impose penalties not exceeding ten dollars for each offense on persons
offending against any rule or regulation established by the township ;
8. To apply penalties when collected in such manner as they deem most con-
ducive to the interests of the township ;
0. To ratify or reject recommendations offered by the board of township su-
pervisors for the expenditure of funds for the purpose of purchasing building
sites and for the purchase, location, erection, or removal of any building or erec-
tion for township purposes. No recommendation shall be adopted except by a two-
thirds vote of the electors present and voting at any annual township meeting ;
10. To authorize and empower the board of township supervisors to purchase
liquids, compounds, or other ingredients for the destruction of noxious weeds,
and sprinklers to be used in spraying said liquids or compounds. No township
shall purchase more than two such sprinklers in any one year ;
11. Repealed by S.L. 1949, ch. 343, § 1 ;
12. To authorize aid to a district fair association within the limits provided
in title 4, Agriculture ;
13. To authorize the levy of township taxes for the repair and construction of
roads and bridges and for other township charges and expenses within the limits
lii-escribed in title 57, Taxation;
14. To direct the expenditure of funds raised for the repair and construction
of roads within the limits provided in title 24, Highways, Bridges, and Ferries ;
To authorize the dissolution of the township in the manner provided in
this title;
16. To authorize the purchase and maintenance of dipping tanks as provided in
title 30,* Livestock ;
17. To authorize (he purchase of township firefighting equipment in the man-
ner provided in title 18.** Fires; and to authorize the entering into a contract
for Are protection as provided for in section 18-00-10; and
15. To establish a fund for the eradication of gophers, prairie dogs, crows, and
magpies.
L9. To authorize the expenditure of township funds for weather modification
activities.
97 17:1-/5. Weather modification. — The division of disaster emergency services
shall keep continuously apprised of weather conditions which present danger of
precipitation pr other climatic activity severe enough to constitute a disaster. If
flic division determines that precipitation that may result from weather inoditi-
cation operations, either by itself or in conjunction with other precipitation or
climatic conditions or activity, would create or contribute to the severity of a
575
disaster, it shall direct the officer or agency empowered to issue permits for
weather modification operations to suspend the issuance of the permits. There-
upon, no permits may be issued until the division informs the officer or agency
that the danger has passed.
Source : S. L. 1973. ch. 281, § 15.
2-07-01. Ownership of ivater. — In order that the state may share to the fullest
extent in the benefits already gained through fundamental research and investi-
gation on new and improved means for predicting, influencing, and controlling
the weather, for the best interest, general welfare, health, and safety of all the
people of the state, and to provide proper safeguards in applying the measures
for use in connection therewith in order to protect life and property, it is deemed
necessary and hereby declared that the state of North Dakota claims its sovereign
right to use the moisture contained in the clouds and atmosphere within the
sovereign state boundaries. All water derived as a result of weather modification
operations shall be considered a part of North Dakota's basic water supply and
all statutes, rules, and regulations applying to natural precipitation shall also
apply to precipitation resulting from cloud seeding.
Source : S. L. 1965, ch. 71, § 1 ; 1975, ch. 50, § L
2-07-01.1. Declaration of policy and purpose. — The legislative assembly finds
that weather modification affects the public health, safety, and welfare, and that,
properly conducted, weather modification operations can improve water quality
and quantity, reduce losses from weather hazards, and provide economic benefits
for the people of the state. Therefore, in the public interest, weather modification
shall be subject to regulation and control, and research and development shall be
encouraged. In order to minimize possible adverse effects, weather modification
operations shall be carried on with proper safeguards, and accurate information
shall be recorded concerning such operations and the benefits obtained therefrom
by the people of the state.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 2.
2-07-02. Definitions. — As used herein, unless the context or subject matter
otherwise requires :
1. "Weather modification" means and extends to the control, alteration,
amelioration of weather elements including man-caused changes in the natural
precipitation process, hail suppression or modification and alteration of other
weather phenomena including temperature, wind direction and velocity, and the
initiating, increasing, decreasing and otherwise modifying by artificial methods
of precipitation in the form of rain, snow, hail, mist or fog through cloud seeding,
electrification or by other means to provide immediate practical benefits ;
2. "Initiating precipitation" refers to the process of causing precipitation from
clouds that could not otherwise or inducing precipitation significantly earlier than
would have occurred naturally ;
3. ''Increasing precipitation" refers to the activation of any process which will
actually result in greater amounts of moisture reaching the ground in any area
from a cloud or cloud system than would have occurred naturally ;
4. '"Hail suppression" refers to the activation of any process which will reduce,
modify, suppress, eliminate or soften hail formed in clouds or storms ;
5. "Person" means any person, firm, association, organization, partnership,
company, corporation, private or public, county, city, trust or other public
agencies :
6. "Controller" refers to any licensee duly authorized in this state to engage in
weather modification activities ;
7. "Board" means the North Dakota weather modification board which, in the
exercise of the powers granted herein, shall have all of the powers of an admin-
istrative agency as defined in chapter 28-32 ;
8. "Research and development" means exploration, field experimentation, and
extension of investigative findings and theories of a scientific or technical nature
into practical application for experimental and demonstration purposes, including
the experimental production of models, devices, equipment, materials, and proc-
esses ; and
9. "Operation" means the performance of any weather modification activity
undertaken for the purpose of producing or attempting to produce any form of
modifying effect upon the weather within a limited geographical area or within
a limited period of time.
Source : S. L. 1965, ch. 71, § 2 : 1975. ch. 50. §§ 3, 4.
2-07-02.1. North Dakota weather modification board — Created — Membership. —
There is hereby created a North Dakota weather modification board which shall
576
be a division of the state aeronautics commission. The board shall be composed of
the director of the state aeronautics commission, a representative of the environ-
mental section of the state department of health, state engineer of the state water
conservation commission, and seven additional board members ; one member from
each of seven districts established by section 2-07-02.2. The governor shall ap-
point one board member for each of the seven districts from a list of three candi-
dates given to him by weather modification authorities in each such district :
1. When the entire board is to be initially appointed, provided that such ap-
pointments shall be made within thirty days after July 1, 1975.
2. When the term of office of any board member from any district is about to
expire.
3. When a vacancy has occurred, or is about to occur, in the term of office of a
board member from any district for any reason other than expiration of term of
office.
Board members from each district shall serve for a four-year term of office
except in the event the governor shall appoint a member for an unexpired term,
in which case the member shall serve only for the unexpired term. In the event
any district fails to furnish a list to the governor, or if there are no weather
modification authorities under this chapter within a district, then the governor
shall appoint a board member of his choice residing within such district.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 5.
2-07-02.2. Weather modification board — Districts created. — Members of the
weather modification board shall be appointed from districts containing the fol-
lowing counties : District I — Burke, Divide, McKenzie, Mountrail, and Williams ;
District II — Bottineau, McHenry, McLean, Renville, Sheridan, and Ward; Dis-
trict III — Benson, Cavalier, Eddy, Foster, Griggs, Nelson, Pierce, Ramsey, Rol-
ette, Steele, Towner, and Wells; District IV — Cass, Grand Forks, Pembina,
Richland, Traill, and Walsh; District V — Barnes, Dickey, Kidder, LaMoure,
Logan, Mcintosh, Ransom, Sargent, and Stutsman ; District VI — Burleigh, Em-
mons, Grant, Mercer, Morton, Oliver, and Sioux ; District VII — Adams, Billings,
Bowman, Dunn, Golden Valley, Hettinger, Slope, and Stark.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 6.
2-01-02.3. Direction and supervision by aeronautics commission — Independent
functions retained bp board. — The powers, functions, and duties of the North
Dakota weather modification board shall be administered under the direction and
supervision of the North Dakota aeronautics commission, but the board shall re-
tain the quasi-judicial, quasi-legislation, advisory, and other nonadministrative
and budgetary functions otherwise vested in it.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 7.
2-07-02.4. Weather modification board — Officers — Compensation. — All mem-
bers of the weather modification board, with the exception of the chairman,
shall be voting members. The board shall elect annually from its membership a
chairman, vice chairman, and secretary. A majority of the members shall con-
stitute a quorum for the purpose of conducting the business of the board. Board
members who are not full-time salaried employees of this state shall receive
compensation in the amount provided in subsection 1 of section 54-35-10, and
shall be reimbursed for their mileage and expenses in the amounts provided by
sections 44-08-04 and 54-06-09. All other members of the board shall be reim-
bursed for necessary travel and other expenses incurred in the performance of
the business of the board in the amounts provided in sections 44-08-04 and
54-06-09.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 8.
2-07-02.5. Powers and duties of weather modification board. — The board may
exercise the following powers and shall have the following duties :
1. The board shall appoint an executive director to serve at its discretion, and
perform such duties as assigned by the board.
2. The board shall authorize the employment of whatever staff it deems neces-
sary to carry out the provisions of this chapter. The executive director shall hire
the staff, subject to the approval of the board.
3. The board shall make reasonable rules and regulations concerning: quali-
fications, procedures and conditions for issuance, revocation, suspension, and
modification of licenses and permits; standards and instructions governing
weather modification operations, including monitoring and evaluation; record-
keeping and reporting, and the board shall establish procedures and forms for
such recordkeeping and reporting. The board may adopt all other reasonable
rules and regulations necessary to the administration of this chapter. The pro-
visions of chapter 2^32 shall apply to this chapter.
4. The board may contract with any person, association, partnership, or cor-
poration, with the federal government, and with any county or groups of coun-
ties, as provided in section 2-07-05, to carry out weather modification operations
and shall, in connection with regulated weather modification operations, carry
on monitoring and evaluation activities.
5. The board may order any person who is conducting weather modification
operations in violation of this chapter, or any rules and regulations promulgated
pursuant to it, to cease and desist from such operations and such order shall be
enforceable in any court of competent jurisdiction within this state.
6. The board may cooperate and contract with any private person or any local,
state, or national commission, organization, or agency engaged in activities sim-
ilar to the work of the board and may make contracts and agreements to carry
out programs consistent with the purpose and intent of this chapter. The board
may also, in accordance with law, request and accept any grants of funds or
services from any such commission, organization, person, or agency, and expend
such funds or use such services to carry out the provisions of this chapter.
7. The board shall administer and enforce the provisions of this chapter and
do all things reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of this chapter.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 9.
2-07-03. License and permit required. — Except as provided in section
2-07-03.1, no person may engage in weather modification activiites without both
a professional weather modification license issued under section 2-07-03.2 and a
weather modification permit issued under section 2-07-04. Licenses shall expire on
December thirty-first of the year of issuance.
2-01-03.1. Exemptions. — The board may provide by rules and regulations for
exemption of the following activities from the permit and license requirements
of section 2-07-03 :
1. Research and development conducted by the state, political subdivisions of
the state, colleges and universities of the state, agencies of the federal govern-
ment, or bona fide research corporations.
2. Weather modification operations of an emergency nature taken against fire,
frost, or fog.
Exempted activities shall be so conducted so as not to unduly interfere with
weather modification operations conducted under a permit issued in accordance
with this chapter.
Source : S. L. 197o, ch. 50, § 11.
2-01-03.2. Operator deemed to be doing business within state — Resident
agent. — A person shall be deemed doing business within this state when engaged
in weather modification operations within the boundaries of this state, and shall,
if not already qualified to do business within this state under chapter 10-22, prior
to conducting such operation, file with the secretary of state an authorization
designating an agent for the service of process.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 12.
2-01-03.3 Issuance of license — Fee. — The board shall provide, by rules and
regulations, the procedure and criteria for the issuance of a license. The board, in
■accordance with its rules and regulations, shall issue a weather modification
license to each applicant who :
1. Pays a license fee of fifty dollars.
2. Demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the board, competence to engage in
weather modification operations.
3. Designates an agent for the purpose of service of process pursuant to section
-2-07-03.2 or chapter 10-22.
Each license issued by the board shall be nontransferable and shall expire on
December thirty-first of the year of issuance. A license shall be revocable for
cause at any time prior to such date if, after holding a hearing pursuant to due
notice thereof, the board shall so determine. License fees collected by the board
shall be paid into the general fund of the state treasury.
Source : S. L. 1975. ch. 50, § 13.
2-01-034. Revocation or suspension of license. — The board may suspend or
revoke a license for any of the following reasons :
1. Incompetency.
2. Dishonest practice.
3. False or fraudulent representations made in obtaining a license or permit
under this chapter.
578
4. Failure to comply with any provisions of this chapter, or any rules or regu-
lations of the board made pursuant to this chapter.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 14.
2-07-0^. Permit required — Issuance of permit — Fee. —
1. A Weather modification permit shall be required for each geographical area,,
as set out in the operational plan required by subsection 2 of this section, in
which a person intends to conduct weather modification operations. Each permit
issued by the board shall expire on December thirty-first of the year of issuance. A
person applying for a weather modification operational permit shall file an
application with the board, in such form as the board shall prescribe, which ap-
plication shall be accompanied by an application fee of twenty-five dollars and
contain such information as the board, by rule or regulation, may require, and
in addition, each applicant for a permit shall :
a. Furnish proof of financial responsibility as provided by section 2-07-04.3.
b. Set forth a complete operational plan for the proposed operation which
shall include a specific statement of its nature and object, a map of the pro-
posed operating area which specifies the primary target area for the pro*
l>osed operation and shows the area that is reasonably expected to be affected
by such operation, a statement of the approximate time during which the
operation is to be conducted, a list of the materials and methods to be used
in conducting the operation, and such other detailed information as may be
needed to describe the operation.
2. The board may issue the operational permit if it determines that :
a. The applicant holds a valid weather modification license issued under
this chapter.
b. The applicant has furnished satisfactory proof of financial responsibility
in accordance with section 2-07-04.3.
c. The applicant has paid the required application fee.
d. The operation :
(1) Is reasonably conceived to improve water quantity or quality, re-
duce loss from weather hazards, provide economic benefits for the people
of this state, advance scientific knowledge or otherwise carry out the
purposes of this chapter.
(2) Is designed to include adequate safeguards to minimize or avoid
possible damage to the public health, safety, or welfare or to the environ-
ment.
(3) Will not adversely affect another operation for which a permit
has been issued.
e. The applicant has North Dakota workmen's compensation insurance
coverage for all employees working in North Dakota.
f. The applicant has furnished a performance bond as required by section
2-07-00.
g. The applicant has complied with such other requirements for the issu-
ance of permits as may be required by the rules and regulations of the
board.
h. The applicant has furnished a bid bond in accordance with section
2-07-09.1.
i. The applicant has registered, with the North Dakota aeronautics com-
mission, any aircraft and pilots intended to be used in connection with the
operation.
In order to carry out the objectives and purposes of this chapter, the board
may condition and limit permits as to primary target areas, time of the operation,
materials, equipment, and methods to be used in conducting the operation, emer-
gency shutdown procedure, emergency assistance, and such other operational
requirements as may be established by the board.
3. The board shall issue only one permit at a time for operations in any geo-
graphical area if two or more operations conducted in such an area according
to permit limitations blight adversely interfere with one another.
4. All permit fees collected by the board shall be paid into the general fund
of the state treasury.
2-07-OJf.l. llrnrinqs. — The board shall give public notice, in the. official county
newspaper or newspapers in the area of the state reasonably expected to be
a fiected by operations conducted under a permit, that it is considering an applica-
tion for such permit, and. if objection to the issuance of the permit is received
by the board wit bin twenty days, the board may hold a public hearing for the
579
purpose of obtaining information from the public concerning the effects of issuing
the permit. The board may also hold such hearings Upon its own motion.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 16.
2-07-04.2. Revocation, suspension, or modification of permit. — The board may
suspend or revoke a permit if it appears that the permittee no longer has the
qualifications necessary for the issuance of an original permit or has violated
any provision of this chapter, or any of the rules and regulations issued under it.
The board may revise the conditions and limits of a permit if :
1. The permittee is given notice and a reasonable opportunity for a hearing, to
be held in accordance with chapter 28-32.
2. It appears to the board that a modification of the conditions and limits of
a permit is necessary to protect the public's health, safety, or welfare or the
environment.
If it appears to the board that an emergency situation exists or is impending
which could endanger the public's health, safety, or welfare or the environ-
ment, the board may, without prior notice or hearing, immediately modify the
conditions or limits of a permit, or order temporary suspension of a permit. The
issuance of such an order shall include notice of a hearing to be held within ten
days thereafter on the question of permanently modifying the conditions and lim-
its or continuing the suspension of the permit. Failure to comply with an order
temporarily suspending an operation or modifying the conditions and limits of a
permit shall be grounds for immediate revocation of the license and permit of
the person controlling or engaged in the operation.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 17.
2-07-04-3. Proof of financial responsibility. — Proof of financial responsibility
is made by showing to the satisfaction of the board that the permittee has the
ability to respond in damages to liability which might reasonably result from
the operation for which the permit is sought. Such proof of financial responsi-
bility may be shown by :
1. Presentation to the board of proof of a prepaid noncancellable insurance
policy against such liability, in an amount approved by the board.
2. Filing with the board a corporate surety bond, cash, or negotiable securities
in an amount approved by the board.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 18.
2-07-05. Board may create operating districts — Representation of noncon-
trading counties. — The board shall have the authority to place any county con-
tracting with the state for weather modification operations, in such an opera-
tional district as the board shall deem necessary to best provide such county with
the benefits of weather modification. In determining the boundaries of such oper-
ating districts, the board shall consider the patterns of crops within the state,
climatic patterns, and the limitations of aircraft and other technical equipment.
The board may assign any county which has not created a weather modification
authority under this chapter to an operating district solely for the purpose of
representation on the operations committee of such district.
Source : S. L. 1965, ch. 71, § 5 ; 1975, ch. 50, § 19.
CROSS-REFEREXCE
Suspension of issuance of weather modification permits at direction of division
of disaster emergency services, see § 37-17.1-15.
2-07-05.1. District operations advisory committees created — Duties. —
1. There shall be a district operations advisory committee in each operations
district created in accordance with section 2-07-05. Each committee shall be com-
posed of one commissioner of the weather modification authority from each county
within such district and one member of the board of county commissioners from
the county or counties assigned to the district in accordance with section 2-07-05.
Each advisory committee shall, upon majority vote, with the concurrence of the
board, prescribe rules, regulations, and bylaws necessary to govern its procedures
and meetings. Each committee shall evaluate weather modification operations
within their respective districts and make recommendations and proposals to
the board concerning such operations.
2. The weather modification authority of any county authorized to contract
for weather modification operations under this chapter and not assigned to an
operations district, shall assume the functions of the district operations com-
mittee and shall have and may exercise the powers and duties assigned to such
580
operations committees by this chapter and by the rules and regulations of the
board of' weather modification.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 20.
2-07-05.2. Weather modification authority map suspend operations. — Other
provisions of this chapter notwithstanding, the weather modfication authority
in any county authorized to contract for weather modification operations under
this chapter may suspend the county and state weather modification operation
within that county designed to alter the weather within such county.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 21.
2-07-06. Weather modification authority created oy petition. — A weather
modification authority shall be created by resolution and five commissioners ap-
pointed thereto for ten-year terms of office, by the board of county commissioners
after fifty-one percent of the qualified electors of a county, as determined by the
vote cast for the office of governor at the last preceding general election, shall
petition the board of county commissioners of their county to create a county-
wide weather modification authority. The board of county commissioners shall
appoint the five commissioners to the weather modification authority, who are
residents of their county, and whose names are set forth in the petition and des-
ignated by the petitioner to be appointed weather modification authority com-
missioner is unable or refuses for any reason to accept appointment as commis-
sioners to have met the requirements as to number of qualified electors attached
to be petition as required in this chapter. In the event any one of the five candi-
dates named in the petition to be appointed weather modification authority com-
missioner is unable or refuses for any reason to accept appointment as commis-
sioner, or is disqualified by not meeting residence requirements, as an elector in
the county, the board of county commissioners shall name its own appointee for
a ten-year term of office in place of any disqualified candidate selected by the
petitioners. If any weather modification authority commissioner submits his res-
ignation in writing to the board of county commssioners or becomes unable or
disqualified for any reason, after accepting office, the board of county commis-
sioners shall name its appointee as a commissioner to the weather modification au-
thority. All vacancies occurring otherwise than by expiration of term of office
shall be filled for the unexpired term.
Any weather modification authority created pursuant to this section shall
expire ten years after the date of the initial appointment of the commissioners
thereto. Any unexpended funds remaining in the name of the weather modifica-
tion authority, after all proper bills and expenses have been paid, shall be trans-
ferred into the county general fund by the officers of the weather modification au-
thority on or before the ten-year termination date provided by this section ; pro-
vided, however, that all unexpended funds remaining in the name of the weather
modification authority, after all proper bills and expenses have been paid, shall
remain in the name of the weather modification authority if the board of county
commissioners of such county by resolution creates a weather modification
authority and all its powers in accordance with section 2-07-06.4.
2-01-06.1. Petition contents. — The petition for petitioning the board of county
commissioners in any county of this state for the creation and appointment of
commissioners to a weather modification authority shall under this chapter
contain :
1. A title with the heading: "Petition for Creation of (insert name of county)
Weather Modifications Authority" ;
2. The following paragraph : We, the undersigned qualified electors of (name
of county), state of North Dakota, by this initiated petition request that the
( name of county) board of county commissioners of said county create by resolu-
tion a (name of county) weather modification authority and to appoint for a term
of office of ten years the following five qualified electors of said county as the
commissioners for the (name of county) weather modification authority : (a) The
name and address of each proposed commissioner for the (name of county)
weather modification authority;
3. The following paragraph : We, the undersigned qualified electors of the
'( mime of county), state of North Dakota, are noticed herewith that the creation
of (name of county) weather modification authority and the appointment of its
commissioners by the (name of county) board of county commissioners will grant
unto the authority by law the power to certify to the board of county commis-
sioners a mill levy tax not to exceed two mills upon the net taxable valuation of
property in said county for a weather modification fund, which tax may be levied
5S1
in excess of the mill levy limit fixed by law for taxes for general county purposes
and that such fund shall be used for weather modification activities in conjunc-
tion with the state of North Dakota. We, the undersigned understand that the
authority requested in this petition expires ten years after the creation of the
weather modification authority, except that the board of county commissioners
may be resolution create a weather modification authority and all its power, in-
cluding the power to certify a tax levy as provided by section 2-07-06.3, for five-
year periods in accordance with section 2-07-06.4;
4. A heading: "Committee for Petitioners", followed by this statement: The
following electors of (name of county), state of North Dakota, are authorized to
represent and act for us, and shall constitute the ''Committee for the Petitioners''
iu the matter of this petition and all acts subsequent thereto;
5. Petition details : All petitions' signatures shall be numbered, and dated by
month, day and year. The name shall be written with residence address and post-
office address including the county of residence followed by state of North
Dakota ;
6. An affidavit to be attached by each petition and sworn to under oath before
a notary public by the person circulating each petition attesting to the fact that
he circulated the petition and that each of the signatures to said petition is the
genuine signature of the person whose name it purports to be, and that each such
person is a qualified elector in the county in which the petition was circulated ;
and
7. The petition must state the mills to be levied by the county for the purposes
of this chapter.
Sources : S. L. 1969, ch. 82, § 2 ; 1973, ch. 49, § 2 ; 1975, ch. 50, § 22.
2-07-06.2. Commisioners — Compensation — Meetings — Officers. — A commis-
sioner of a weather modification authority shall receive no compensation for his
services, but shall be entitled to the necessary expense, as defined in section
44-08-04, incurred in the discharge of his duties. Each commissioner shall hold
office until his successor has been appointed and has qualified. The certificates of
the appointment shall be filed with the weather modification authority.
The powers of each weather modification authority shall be vested in the com-
missioners thereof. A majority of the commissioners of an authority shall con-
stitute a quorum for the purpose of conducting business of the authority and
exercising its powers and for all other purposes. Action may be taken by the
authority upon a vote of not less than a majority of all the commissioners.
There shall be elected a chairman, vice-chairman, and treasurer from among
the commissioners. A weather modification authority may employ an executive di-
rector, secretary, technical experts, and such other officers, agents, and employees,
permanent and temporary, as it may require, and shall determine their qualifica-
tions, duties, and compensation. For such legal services as it may require, an
authority may call upon the chief law officer of the county which created the
authority. An authority may delegate to one or more of its agents or employees
such powers or duties as it may deem proper.
Minutes shall be kept by the secretary of official meetings and shall include all
official business such as contracts authorized and all authorizations for payment
of weather modification authority funds to persons, organizations, companies,
and corporations. All disbursements shall be approved by a majority of all the
commissioners of an authority. Disbursements authorized by the authority for
the payment of employee salaries, bills, contracts, services, fees, expenses, and
all other obligations, shall be made by check signed by the chairman and the
treasurer of the authority. Official policies shall also be entered into the minutes.
An annual report shall be compiled with complete disclosure of funds expended
for contracts, services, fees, salaries and all other reimbursements, a copy of
which shall be filed with the county auditor. Such report shall be given at a
public meeting called for such purpose.
Source : S. L. 1969, ch. 82, § 3 ; 1973, ch. 49, § 3.
2-01-06.S. Tax levy may be certified by weather modification authority. — The
weather modification authority may certify annually to the board of county com-
missioners a tax of not to exceed two mills upon the net taxable valuation of
the property in the county for a "weather modification" fund which tax shall be
levied by the board of county commissioners and which tax may be levied in
excess of the mill limit fixed by law for taxes for general county purposes. Such
fund shall be used only for weather modification activities in conjunction with
the state of North Dakota. The tax certified by the weather modification authority
582
is limited to the period of existence of the weather modification authority as
provided for in this chapter.
Source: S. L. 1909, ch. 82, § 4; 1973, ch. 49, § 4; 1975, ch. 50, § 23.
2-07-06..$. Creation of weather modification authority and its powers by
resolution. — When a weather modification authority is about to expire, the board
of county commissioners of any such county may by resolution authorize the
creation of such weather modification authority and all its powers, including
the power to certify a tax levy as provided by section 2-07-06.3 for additional
five-year periods provided, the resolution authorizing the creation of such
weather modification authority is adopted by the board of county commissioners
before the expiration date prescribed in the preceding resolution for its termi-
nation. Upon passing such resolution for the creation of the authority, the board
of county commissioners shall appoint five weather modification authority com-
missioners to five-year terms of office, subsequently filling vacancies in the man-
ner prescribed by section 2-07-06. The board of county commissioners may
remove from office any weather modification commissioner, whenever it appears
to them by competent evidence and after a hearing that such commissioner has
been guilty of misconduct, malfeasance, crime in office, neglect of duty in office,
or of habitual drunkenness or gross incompetency.
Source : S. L. 1973, ch. 49, § 5.
2-07-06.5. Procedure for abolishment of weather modification authority and
all its powers by recall initiated petition. — After fifty-one percent of the quali-
fied electors of a county, as determined by the vote cast for the office of governor
at the last preceding gubernatorial election, shall petition the board of county
commissioners of their county to recall the commissioners of a weather modifi-
cation authority as created by section 2-07-06 and to abolish such county weather
modification authority, the board of county commissioners shall adopt a resolu-
tion recalling all commissioners of such weather modification authority and
abolish their appointed office and abolish such weather modification authority
until such time as a weather modification authority is created by petition in
accordance with section 2-07-06. provided that such recall petition has been
found by the county commissioners to have met the requirements as to the num-
ber of qualified electors attached to the petition as required in this chapter. In
the event the board of county commissioners certifies the sufficiency and validity
of the recall petition and adopts a resolution recalling all commissioners of a
weather modification authority and abolishes such authority, then all unexpended
funds remaining in the name of the weather modification authority, after all
proper bills and expenses have been paid, shall be transferred into the county gen-
eral fund by the officers of the weather modification authority on the effective date
of such recall and abolishment resolution adopted by the board of county commis-
sioners. Tn the event there are outstanding valid bills unpaid after such date, the
board of county commissioners is hereby authorized to pay such proper obliga-
tions from moneys in the county general fund. A recall initiated petition shall
have a title with the heading: "Recall Petition for the Abolishment of (insert
name of county) Weather Modification Authority". Such recall petition shall
incorporate a paragraph stating its purpose in clear lansruage and shall comply
with all requirements prescribed in subsections 4. 5. and 6 of section 2-07-06.1
relating to petition contents, committee for petitioners, petition details, affidavits
and persons circulating such petitions.
2-07-06.6. Creation of weaiher modification authority by election. — When a
petition signed by not less than twenty percent of the qualified electors of the
county, as determined by the vote cast for the office of governor at the last
preceding gubernatorial election, requesting an election upon the establishment
of such recall and abolishment resolution adopted by the board of county commis-
sioners, the board of county commissioners shall submit the question to the elec-
tors of the county at the next county-wide election. Upon approval bv a majority
of the votes cast, the board of county commissioners shall establish a weather
modification authority as described in section 2-07-06. with all its powers, in-
cluding the power to certify a tax lew as provided bv section 2-07-06.3.
Source: S. L. 1973. ch. 49, § 7.
2-07-06.7. Abolishment of wenther modification authority by election. — When
a petition Signed by not less than twenty percent of the qualified electors of the
county, as determined by the vote cast for governor in the last preceding guha-
natorial election, rouuosfiiur an election upon the abolishment of a weather
modification authority as created in section 2-07-O6.4 and section 2-07-06. 6 is
presented to the board of county commissioners, the board of county commis-
583
sinners shall submit the question to the electors of the county at the next county-
wide election. Upon approval by a majority of the votes cast, the board of county
commissioners shall abolish the weather modification authority as of December
thirty-first following the election. All unexpended funds remaining in the name
of the weather modification authority, after all proper bills and expenses have
been paid, shall be deposited in the general fund of the county.
Source : S. L. 1973, ch. 49, § 8.
2-07-06.8. Creation of weather modification authority by vote after resolution
of county commissioners. — The board of county commissioners of any county may,
by resolution after a public hearing, submit the question of the creation of a
weather modification authority to the electors of the county at the next county-
wide election. Upon approval by a majority of the votes cast, the board of county
commissioners shall pass a resolution creating a weather modification authority,
as described in section 2-07-06, including the authority to levy a tax as provided
by section 2-07-06.3.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 24.
2-07-07. County budget may be waived for first appropriation — Conditions. —
The provisions of chapter 11-23 shall not apply to appropriations made under the
provisions of this chapter, provided, however, that only after the filing and ap-
proval of the "petitions" to create a weather modification authority by the board
of county commissioners and certification of a mill levy by the weather modifica-
tion authority and only for the initial or first appropriation of said "weather
modification" activities, such county commissioners may, at their discretion, ap-
propriate from moneys not otherwise appropriated in the general fund, such
moneys as are necessary for carrying out the provisions of this chapter, provided
that said appropriation shall not exceed an amount equal to two-mill levy upon
the net taxable valuation of the property in said county.
Source: S. L. 1965, ch. 71. § 7; 1969, ch. 82, § 5.
2-07-08. Bids required — When. — Whenever the board of weather modification
shall undertake to contract with any licensed controller in an amount in excess
of ten thousand dollars in any one year, the board shall advertise for proposals
for such weather modification activities and in its proceedings with respect
to bids therefor, shall substantially follow the manner and form required by
the laws of this state for the purchase of supplies by the department of accounts
and purchases. The board shall enter into no contract or agreement for weather
modification services except with a controller, holding the permit as required by
This chapter, except for the purpose of gathering technical information, and
making studies or survevs.
Source: S. L. 1965, ch. 71, § 8; 1973, ch. 49, § 9; 1975. ch. 50, § 25.
2-07-09. Performance bond required. — Before the board shall contract with
any controller, it shall require the controller to furnish a surety bond for the
faithful performance of the contract in such amount as determined by the board,
conditioned that the licensee and his agents will in all respects faithfully per-
form all weather modification contracts undertaken with the board and will
comply wTith all provisions of this chapter and the contract entered into by
the board and the licensee.
Source: S. L. 1965, ch. 71, § 9 : 1973, ch. 49, § 10: 1975, ch. 50, § 20.
2-07-09.1 Bid bond required. — All bids submitted to the board of weather
modification for operations conducted under this chapter shall be accompanied
by a bidder's bond in a sum equal to five percent of the full amount of the bid,
executed by the bidder as principal and by a surety company authorized to do
business in this state as a guaranty that the bidder will enter into the contract
if it is awarded to him.
Source : S. L. 1975. ch. 50. § 27.
2-07-10. State immunity. — Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to im-
pose or accept any liability or responsibility on the part of the state of North
Dakota or any of its agencies, or any state officials or state employees or weather
modification authorities for any injury caused by weather modification opera-
tions by any person or licensed controller as defined in this chapter.
Source: S. L. 1965, ch. 71, § 10; 1973, ch. 49, § 11 ; 1975, ch. 50, § 28.
2-07-10.1. Liability of controller. —
1. An operation conducted under the license and permit requirements of
this chapter is not an ultrahazardous or abnormally dangerous activity which
makes the permittee subject to liability without fault.
2. Dissemination of materials and substances into the atmosphere by a per-
mittee acting within the conditions and limits of his permit shall not constitute
trespass.
584
3. Except as provided in this section and in section 2-07-10, nothing in this
chapter shall prevent any person adversely affected by a weather modifica-
tion operation from recovering damages resulting from negligent or inten-
tionally harmful conduct by a permittee.
4. The fact that a person holds a license or was issued a permit under this
chapter, or that he has complied with the rules and regulations made by the
board pursuant to this chapter, is not admissible as a defense in any legal
action which may be brought against him.
Source : S. L. 1975, ch. 50, § 29.
2-07-11. Weather modification board may receive and expend funds. — The
weather modification board is hereby authorized to receive and accept for and
in the name of the state any and all funds which may be offered or become
available from federal grants or appropriations, private gifts, donations or
bequests, county funds, or funds from any other source, except license and permit
fees, and to expend said funds for the expense of administering this chapter,
and, with the exception of county funds, for the encouragement of research and
development in weather modification by any private person, the North Dakota
state university, the university of North Dakota, or any other appropriate
state, county, or public agency in this state either by direct grant, by contract,
or by other means.
All federal grants, federal appropriations, private gifts, donations or bequests,
county funds, or funds from any other source, except license and permit fees,
received by the board shall be paid over to the state treasurer, who shall credit
same to a special fund in the state treasurer, who shall credit some to a special
fund in the state treasury known as the "state weather modification fund".
All proceeds deposited by the state treasurer in the state weather modifi-
cation fund are hereby appropriated to the North Dakota weather modifica-
tion board and shall, if expended, be disbursed by warrant-check prepared
by the department of accounts and purchases upon vouchers submitted by
the North Dakota weather modification board, and shall be used for the pur-
pose of paying for the expense of administration of this chapter and. with
the exception of county funds, for the encouragement of research and develop-
ment in weather modification by any private person, the North Dakota state
university, the university of North Dakota, or any other appropriate state, coun-
ty, or public agency bv direct grant, bv contract, or bv other means.
Source : S. L. 1965, ch. 71, § 11 ; 1975, ch. 50, § 30.
2-07-11.1. County appropriations — State to provide matching funds. — Any coun-
ty weather modification authority which has contracted with the board of
weather modification for weather modification operations under this chapter
shall appropriate to the state weather modification fund one-half of the total
amount determined by the board of weather modification as necessary to provide
such county with weather modification operations. The board of weather modifica-
tion may expend, from the state weather modification fund, such funds as it
deems necessary to provide contracting counties with weather modification
operations.
2-07-12. Aeronautics commission — Compensation — Expenses. — Each member of
the North Dakota aeronautics commission shall receive the same compensation
that is paid for other aeronautics commission duties for each day actually and
necessarily engaged in performance of official duties in connection with the
administration of this chapter, and commission members and employees shall
be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred in carrying out their
official duties in the same manner and at the same rates as provided by law
for state employees.
2-07-13. Penalty. — Any person contracting for or conducting any weather
modification activity without being licensed in accordance with the provisions
of this chapter or otherwise violating the provisions thereof shall be guilty of a
class B misdemeanor.
Oklahoma
Okla. Stat. Ann. Tit. 2, §§ 1401-1432
Chapter 29 — Oklahoma Weather Modification Act
Sec.
1401. Short title.
1402. Definitions.
340.'i. Powers of Board.
1 404. Continued conduct of research and development activities.
1405. Ilearings.
585
Sec.
1406. Gifts and grants.
1407. Necessity for licenses and permits.
1408. Exemptions.
1409. Issuance of licenses.
1410. Issuance of permits.
1411. Separate permits — Notice of intention.
1412. Contents of notice of intention.
141.3. Publication of notice of intention.
1414. Proof of financial responsibility.
1415. Permit fees.
1416. Records and reports.
1416.1 Monitoring by United States Government.
1417. Revocation or suspension of licenses or permits — Modification of permits.
1418. Certain liabilities not imposed or rights affected.
1419. Penalties.
1420. Purpose.
1421. Expenditure of monies.
1422. Receipt of monies — Contracts.
1423. Call for election on weather modification assessment — Notice — Contents.
1424. Proposed budget — Appraisers.
1425. Hearing of protests concerning appraisals.
1426. Collection of assessments.
1427. Weather modification fund — Reports.
142S. Discontinuance of activities.
1429. Essential function of county government — Disbursements.
1430. Liens — Tax sales.
1431. Contracts for joint operations.
1432. Construction — Codification.
llJtOl. Short title
This act may be cited as the "Oklahoma Weather Modification Act."
Laws 1972, c. 228, § 1, eff. April 7, 1972.
§ l>t02. Definitions
As used in this act, unless the context requires otherwise :
1. "Board" means the Oklahoma Water Resources Board ;
2. •"Operation" means the performance of weather modification and control
activities pursuant of weather modification and control activities pursuant to a
single contract entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempting to pro-
duce, a certain modifying effect within one specified geographical area over one
continuing time interval not exceeding one (1) year, or, if the performance of
weather modification and control activities is to be undertaken individually or
jointly by a person or persons to be benefited and not undertaken pursuant to a
contract, '"operation" means the performance of weather modification and con-
trol activities entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempting to pro-
duce, a certain modifying effect within one specified geographical area over one
continuing time interval not exceeding one (1) year ;
3. "Research and development" means theoretical analysis, exploration and
experimentation and the extension of investigative findings and theories of a
scientific or technical nature into practical application for experimental and
demonstration purposes including the experimental production and testing of
models, devices, equipment, materials and processes ; and
4. "Weather modification" or "weather modification and control" means chang-
ing or controlling, or attempting to change or control, by artificial methods the
natural development of any or all atmospheric cloud forms or precipitation forms
which occur in the troposphere. ( Laws 1972, c. 228, § 2, eff. April 7, 1972. Laws
1973, c. ISO, § 14, eff. May To, 1973.)
§ 1403. Poicers of ooard
In the performance of the functions authorized herein, the Board may, in
addition to any other acts authorized by law :
1. Establish advisory committees to advise with and make recommendations
to the Board concerning legislation, policies, administration, research and other
matters ;
2. Establish by regulation or order such standards and instructions to govern
the carrying out of research or projects in weather modification and control as
the Board may deem necessary or desirable to minimize danger to health or
property, and make such regulations as are necessary in the performance of its
powers and duties ;
3. Make such studies and investigations, obtain such information, and hold
such hearings as the Board may deem necessary or proper to assist it in exercis-
ing its authority or in the administration or enforcement of this act or any reg-
ulations or orders issued thereunder ;
586
4. Appoint and fix the compensation of such personnel, including specialists
and consultants, as are necessary to perform its duties and functions hereunder ;
5. Acquire, in the manner provided by law, such materials, equipment and
facilities as are necessary to perforin its duties and functions hereunder ;
6. Cooperate with public or private agencies in the performance of the Board's
functions or duties and in furtherance of the purposes of this act ;
7. Represent the state in any and all matters pertaining to plans, procedures
or negotiations for interstate compacts or cooperative agreements relating to
weather modification and control ;
8. Enter into cooperative agreements with the United States Government
or any of its agencies, other states, or with the various counties and cities of
this state or with any private or public agencies for conducting weather modifi-
cation or cloud seeding operations ;
9. Act for and represent the state and the counties, cities and private or pub-
lic agencies in contracting with private concerns for the performance of weather
modifications or cloud seeding operations ; and
10. Assist and cooperate in the formation of weather modification districts
within this state. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 3, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ 1'fOJf. Continued conduct of research and development activities
The Board shall exercise its powers in such manner as to promote the continued
conduct of research and development activities in the fields specified below by
private or public institutions or persons and to assist in the acquisition of an
expanding fund of theoretical and practical knowledge in such fields. To this end
the Board may conduct, and make arrangements including contracts and agree-
ments for the conduct of, research and development activities relating to :
1. The theory and development of methods of weather modification and con-
trol, including processes, materials and devices related thereto ;
2. Utilization of weather modification and control for agricultural, industrial,
commercial, municipal and other purposes ; and
3. The protection of life and property during research and operational activi-
ties. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 4, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ UfOo. Hearings
In the case of hearings held pursuant to this act, the Board shall conduct such
hearings in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedures
Act.1 (Laws 1972 c.228, § 5, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ UfOG. Gifts and grants
A. The Board may, subject to any limitations otherwise imposed by law, re-
ceive and accept for and in the name of the state any funds which may be of-
fered or become available from federal grants or appropriations, private gifts,
donations or bequests, or from any other source, and may expend such funds,
unless their use is restricted and subject to any limitations otherwise provided
by law, for the administration of this act for operations and research and for
the encouragement of research and development by a state or public or pri-
vate agency, either by direct grant, by contract or other cooperative means.
B. All license and permit fees paid to the Board shall be deposited in the Gen-
eral Revenue Fund of the State Treasurv. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 0, eff. April 7,
1972.)
§ 1407. Necessity for licenses and permits
Except as provided in Section 8 of this act,2 no person, corporation or institution
si i a 11 engage in activities for weather modification and control except under
and in accordance with a license and a permit issued by the Board authorizing
such activities. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 7, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ i4Q8. Exemptions
The Board, to the extent it deems practical, shall provide by regulation for
exempting from the license and permit requirements of this act :
1, Research and development and experiments by state and federal agencies
and institutions of higher learning ;
2. Laboratory research and experiments ;
:;. Activities normally engaged in for purposes other than those of inducing,
Increasing, decreasing or preventing precipitation ; and
1 Section Mm et s»q. of Title 73.
2 Section 1408 of this title.
587
4. Religious ceremonies, rites or acts and American Indian or other cultural
ceremonies which do not utilize chemical or mechanical means to alter weather
phenomena and which are not performed for profit. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 8, eft'.
April 7, 1972.)
§ 1409. Issuance of licenses
A. Licenses to engage in activities for weather modification and control shall
be issued to applicants therefor who pay the license fee required and who
demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Board, competence in the field of
meteorology and financial responsibility reasonably necessary to engage in
activities for weather modification and control. If the applicant is an organiza-
tion, these requirements shall be met by the individual or individuals who are
to be in control and in charge of the operation for the applicant.
B. The Board shall issue licenses in accordance with such procedures and
subject to such conditions as it may by regulation establish to effectuate the
provisions of this act. Each license shall be issued for a period to expire at the
end of the state fiscal year in which it is issued and, if the licensee possesses
the qualifications necessary for the issuance of a new license, such license shall
upon application be renewed at the expiration of such period. A license shall
be issued or renewed only upon the payment to the Board of One Hundred Dol-
lars ($100.00) for the license or renewal thereof. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § eff. April
7, 1972.).
§ lJflO. Issuance of permits
The Board shall issue permits in accordance with such procedures and subject
to such conditions as it may by regulation establish to effectuate the provisions
of this act only :
1. If the applicant is licensed pursuant to this act ;
2. If a sufficient notice of intention is published and proof of publication is
filed as required by Section 13 of this act ; 3
3. If the fee for a permit is paid as required by Section 15 of this act ; 4 and
4. If the applicant has given bond for the faithful performance of any weather
modification contract which the applicant has entered into for the weather modi-
fication operation for which application was made for the permit. The surety
on any bond to guarantee the faithful performance and execution of any work
shall be deemed and held, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding, to con-
sent without notice to an extension of time to the contractor in which to perform
the contract for a period of not more than thirty ( 30) days. (Laws 1972, c. 228,
§10, eff. April 7, 1972.).
§14H- Separate permits — Xotice of intention
A separate permit shall be issued for each operation. Prior to undertaking any
weather modification and control activities the licensee shall file with the Board
and also cause to be published a notice of intention. The licensee, if a permit is
issued, shall confine his activities for the permitted operation substantially
within the time and area limits set forth in the notice of intention, unless modi-
fied by the Board, and his activities shall also conform to any conditions imposed
by the Board upon the issuance of the permit or to the terms of the permit as
modified after issuance. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 11, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ 1412. Contents of notice of intention
The notice of intention shall set forth at least all of the following :
1. The name and address of the licensee ;
2. The nature and object of the intended operation and the person or orga-
nization on whose behalf it is to be conducted ;
3. The area in which and the approximate time during which the operation
will be conducted ;
4. The area which is intended to be affected by the operation : and
5. The materials and methods to be used in conducting the operation. (Laws
1972, c. 228, § 12, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ 1413. Publication of notice of intention
A. The applicant shall cause the notice of intention, or that portion thereof
including the items specified in Section 12 of this act,5 to be published at least
3 Section 1413 of this title.
4 Section 1415 of this title.
e Section 1412 of this title.
588
once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks in a newspaper having a general
circulation and published within any county in which the operation is to be con-
ducted and in which the affected area is located, or, if the operation is to be
conducted in more than one county or if the affected area is located in more than
one county or is located in a county other than the one in which the operation
is to be conducted, then in a newspaper having a general circulation and pub-
lished within each of such counties. In case there is no newspaper published
within the appropriate county, publication shall be made in a newspaper having
a general circulation within the county.
B. Proof of publication together with publisher's affidavit, shall be filed by the
licensee with the Board within fifteen (15) days from the date of the last
publication of the notice.
C. Provided, that upon declaration of emergency drought conditions within
any county or counties of this state by proclamation by the Governor or by
concurrent resolution by the Legislature, the provisions of this act requiring
notice by publication of intent to perform any weather modification operation
may be suspended. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 13, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ iW. Proof of financial responsibility
Proof of financial responsibility shall be furnished by an applicant by his
showing, to the satisfaction of the director, his ability to respond in damages
for liability which might reasonably be attached to or result from his weather
modification and control activities in connection with the operation for which
he seeks a permit. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 14, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ IJflo. Permit fees
The fee to be paid by each applicant for a permit shall not exceed Twenty-five
Dollars ($25.00). (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 15, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ 1416. Records and reports
A. Each licensee shall keep and maintain a record of all operations con-
ducted by him pursuant to his license and each permit, showing the method
employed, the type of equipment used, materials and amounts thereof used, the
times and places of operation of the equipment, the name and post office address
of each individual participating or assisting in the operation other than the
licensee, and such other general information as may be required by the Board,
and shall report the same to the Board at the time and in the manner required
by the Board.
B. The Board shall require written reports regarding methods and results,
but not inconsistent with the provisions of this act, covering each operation for
which a permit is issued. The Board shall also require written reports from
such organizations as are exempt under Section 8 6 from the license and permit
requirements of this act.
C. All information on an operation shall be submitted to the Board before
any information on such operation may be released to the public.
D. The reports and records in the custody of the Board shall be open for
public examination as public documents. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 16, eff. April 7,
1972).
§ UflG.l Monitoring by United States Government
When a permit is issued under the Oklahoma Weather Modification Act for
weather modification research by the United States Government or its agent, any
other operation for which a permit is issued and which is located in full or in
part Within the area of the permitted research operation shall submit to monitor-
ing by the agency conducting such operation when such operation is being
conducted. (Added by Laws 1973, c. ISO, §15, eff. May 16, 1973.)
§ 1 'ill. Revocation or suspension of licenses or permits — Modification of permits
A. Under the provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act,7 the Board
may suspend, revoke or refuse to renew any license or permit issued by it if the
applicant no longer qualifies for such license or permit under the provisions of
this act or if the applicant has violated any provisions of this act.
B. The Board may modify the terms of a permit after issuance thereof if the
licensee is first given notice and a reasonable opportunity for a hearing respecting
the grounds for the proposed modification and if it appears to the Board that
if is necessary for the protection of the health or the property of any person to
make the modification proposed. (Laws 1972, c. 22S, §17, elf. April 7, 1972.)
■ Section 1108 of this title.
7 Section 301 et seq. of Title 75.
589
§ 1418. Certain liabilities not imposed or rights affected
Nothing in this act shall be construed to impose or accept any liability or
responsibility on the part of the state or any state officials or employees for any
weather modification and control activities of any private person or group, or to
affect in any way any contractual, tortious or other legal rights, duties or liabili-
ties between any private persons or groups. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 18, eff. April 7,
1972. )
§ 1419. Penalties
Any person violating any of the provisions of this act or any lawful regulation
or order issued pursuant thereto shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and a continu-
ing violation punishable as a separate offense for each day during which it
occurs, and upon conviction shall be imprisoned in the county jail for not more
than ten (10) days or by a fine of not less than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00)
nor more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), or by both, for each such
separate offense. (Laws 1972, c. 228, § 19, eff. April 7, 1972.)
§ 1420. Purpose
The Legislature finds that it is in the best interest of the citizens of the State
of Oklahoma to establish a procedure whereby the orderly conduct of weather
modification programs can be administered, controlled and financed at the local
level under the licensing and permit system established by the State of Oklahoma ;
further determines that such programs benefit all citizens alid property in areas
where they are operated, and that counties are authorized to finance programs
of weather modification pursuant to the provisions of Article 10. Section 7 of the
Oklahoma Constitution. It is the intention of the Legislature that this act be
liberally construed so as to promote the general welfare and prosperity of the
citizens of this state. (Added by Laws 1973, c. 180, § 1, eft". May 1(5, 1973.)
§ L',-21. Expenditure of monies
Counties, cities, towns, other local subdivisions of government, state agencies,
and special purpose districts may expend monies for weather modification and
control from the following sources :
1. General funds not otherwise obligated, provided that state agencies may
only expend funds for weather modification on lands owned by them or under
their administrative controls or as otherwise provided by law:
2. Monies received by such entities for weather modification and control?
and
3. Monies received from assessments as provided in this act. (Added by Laws
1973, c. 180, § 2, eff. May 16, 1973.)
§ 1422. Receipt of monies — Contracts
Counties, cities, towns, other local subdivisions of government, state agencies,
and special purpose districts may receive public and private donations, pay-
ments and grants for weather modification and control. Any of the foregoing
entities may contract among themselves, with state and federal agencies, and
with private individuals and entities for payments, grants and donations of
money for weather modification and control. (Added by Laws 1973, c. 180, § 3, eff.
May 16, 1973.)
§ 1423. Call for election on weather modification assessment — Notice — Contents
On a petition signed by qualified electors equal to at least ten percent (10% ) of
the total number of votes cast by county electors in the most recent general elec-
tion, or on their own motion, the board of county commissioners shall call an
election and submit to the electors of the county the question of whether or not
an assessment shall be levied. The board of county commissioners may exempt
areas within muncipalities or other areas from the assessment and may contract
with such areas to make payments in lieu of assessments. The county commis-
sioners shall exclude from voting the electors in those areas exempt from assess-
ment. The notice of election shall be published once weekly for four (4) weeks in
a newspaper of general circulation in the county. The notice shall specify the
election date, the proposed weather modification plan, the proposed budget, the
total amount of money proposed to be assessed, the purpose for which it is in-
tended to be used, the maximum annual assessments proposed to be levied and the
number of years, not to exceed five (5) years, for which the assessment shall be
authorized. The election shall be conducted by the county election board in ac-
cordance with the general election laws of this state. The ballots shall contain
the words "Weather Modification-Assessment- Yes" and "Weather Modification-
34-857—79 40
590
Assessment-No." If a majority of votes are "Weather Modification-Yes", the
countv commissioners shall, at the time of the annual levy thereunder, levy the
assessment. (Added by Laws 1973, c. 180, § 4, eff. May 16, 1973.)
§ 1424. Proposed budget — Appraisers — Waiver of assessment
Before calling the election, the board of county commissioners shall prepare a
proposed budget for weather modification and control, which may include, in
addition to actual cost of a weather modification program, the cost of conducting
the election, any additional costs of assessments and collection, payment, of ap-
praisers of benefits, costs of publication of notice and other costs incurred by the
county if it joins with other units of government in joint modification programs.
The board of county commissioners shall then determine, after consideration of
other funds available from all sources, the total amount needed to be raised by
assessment.
The board of county commissioners shall appoint three (3) landowners who are
residents of the area to be assessed, to act as appraisers to appraise and apportion
the benefits and recommend the assessments to pay for such benefits. For such
purpose the appraisers shall use the records of the county assessor. Immediately
after the appraisals are completed, they shall file a written report with the board
of county commissioners. The board of county commissioners may, on their own
motion or on the report of the appraisers and after adopting a uniform policy,
waive the levy of assessment, when the board or appraisers finds that the benefits
and assessments are negligible, are not justifiably economical to collect or are
satisfied by an in lieu payment. Such waiver of assessment shall not be considered
an exemption from assessment for any purpose, including the voting provisions
of the preceding section. (Amended by Laws 1975, c. 305. § 1, emerg. eff. June 7,
1975.)
§ 1425. Hearing of protests concerning appraisals
After an affirmative vote of electors, the commissioners shall appoint a time and
place for holding a public hearing to hear any protests concerning the appraisals.
The hearing shall be held after published notice for two (2) weeks in a newspaper
of general circulation in the county giving the date, time and purpose of the hear-
ing. At the hearing, the board of county comissioners shall have the authority to
review and correct said appraisals and shall by resolution confirm the same as so
revised and corrected by them. Any person objecting to the appraisal of benefits
and assessment of his property as confirmed shall have the right of the appeal to
the district court. (Added by Laws 1973, c. 180, § 6, eff. May 10, 1973.)
§Vf26. Collection of assessments
A. The assessment shall become due and shall be collected at the same time
ad valorem taxes are due and collected. Such annual levy shall be certified not
later than October 1 of each year to the county treasurer of the county in which
the property is situated. The certificate shall be substantially as hereinafter
provided.
B. The certificate shall set forth a table or schedule showing in properly ruled
columns :
1. The names of the owners of the property to be assessed ;
2. The description of the property opposite the names of the owners ;
3. The total amount of the annual assessment on the property :
4. The total amount of all delinquent assessments ;
5. The tolal assessment against the land for the year ;
6. A blank column in which the county treasurer shall record the amounts
collected ;
7. A blank column in which the county treasurer shall record the date of
payment; and
s. A blank column in which the county treasurer shall report the name of
the person who paid.
C. The certificate and report shall be prepared in triplicate in a book named
"Assessment Book of Weather Modification, County, Oklahoma". This
name shall also be printed at the top of each page.
I). Two (2) copies of the certificate shall be forwarded to the county treasurer
of the county wherein the land is located. The county treasurer shall receive the
certificate as a special assessment book, and shall certify it as other special assess-
ment records and shall collect the assessment according to law. The special assess-
ment book shall be treasurer's warrant and authority to demand and receive
the assessment due; and it shall be unlawful for any county treasurer to accept
payment of the ad valorem taxes levied against any property described therein
591
until the owner has been notified that there is a special assessment noted in the
special assessment book. (Added by Laws 1973, c. 180, § 7, eff. May 16, 1973.)
§ 1427. Weather modification fund — Reports
The county treasurer shall establish a weather modification fund and shall de-
posit all monies collected from assessments, grants, donations or other sources for
weather modification purposes and make monthly reports of the sums collected to
the board or county commissioners. The county treasurer shall make a report to
the commissioners immediately after October 31 of each year of the sums collected
and of the assessments not collected. AH assessments remaining unpaid after they
become due and collectible shall be delinquent and bear a penalty in the same
manner as ad valorem taxes. (Added by Laws 1973, c. 180, § 8, eff. May 16, 1973.)
§ 1 ',2S. Discontinuance of activities
If a county ceases to be involved in weather modification activities, any un-
expended funds in the weather modification fund shall be invested in interest-
bearing obligations of the United States Government until weather modification
activities are resumed, with the interest therefrom credited to the weather modifi-
cation fund. If, after five (5) years, the county has not resumed activity in weather
modification, the board of county commissioners shall transfer said unexpended
funds collected by assessment, with interest accrued, to a sinking fund of the
county, to reduce bonded indebtedness, and the board of county commissioners
shall refund, on a pro rata basis, monies from other sources. (Added by Laws
1973, c. 180, § 9, eff. May 16, 1973.)
§ 1429. Essential f unction of county government — Disbursements
The weather modification activities herein authorized shall be deemed to be an
essential function of county government. All disbursements from the weather
modification fund shall be made in accordance with the requirements and pro-
cedures for disbursement from the county general fund. All records required to
be maintained as to disbursements from the county general fund shall likewise
be maintained on disbursements from the weather modification fund. (Added bv
Laws 1973. c. 180, § 10. eff. May 16, 1973. )
§ UfW. Liens — Tax sales
All assessments and all costs and expenses of collecting delinquent assessments
shall constitute a lien on the property against which the assessments have been
levied. Such lien shall attach on the date which the assessment certificate is filed
in the office of the county treasurer and shall continue until paid. Such lien shall
have the same priority as a lien created by delinquent ad valorem taxes, all other
taxes and special assessments. Delinquent assessments shall be collected by the
county treasurer in the same manner and at the same time as delinquent ad
valorem taxes are collected. Any tax sale shall include all costs incurred due to
said sale, and such lien may be evidenced by any ad valorem tax sale certificate
including said charge substantially in the form required by law.
Unless expressly declared to the contrary, no warranty deed or deed made
pursuant to a judicial sale shall warrant against any portion of any assessment
or assessments levied hereunder except installments due before the date of such
deed. (Added by Laws 1973, c. 180, § 11, eff. May 16, 1973.)
§ 1431. Contracts for joint operations
Counties may contract with other counties and other local subdivisions of gov-
ernment and state and federal agencies to engage in joint weather modification
operations. All such contracts shall be filed with and approved by the Board.
(Added by Laws 1973, c. 180, § 12, eff. May 16, 1973.)
§ 1432. Construction — Codification
This act shall be construed as part of the Oklahoma Weather Modification Act,
and Sections 1 through 12 of this act shall be codified as a part thereof. (Added by
Laws 1973. c. 180, § 13, eff. May 16, 1973.)
Oregon
Oregon Rev. Stat. §§558.010-558.990; 451.010; 451.420
Weather Modification
Licensing
558.010 Definitions for ORS 558.010 to 558.140.
558.020 Purpose of ORS 558.10 to 558.140 and 558.990.
592
Artificial weather modification prohibited without license.
.Application for license ; fee.
Applicant to file proof of financial responsibility.
Hearing an application for license.
Issuance of license ; conditions ; licensee's authority ; use of improper materials
cause for suspension or revocation : renewal.
Governmental entities conducting weather modification at airport exempted.
Contents of hearing notice.
Publication of notice of hearing.
Troof of publication.
Records and reports of operations ; public examination.
Emergency licenses.
Revocation, suspension, refusal to issue or renew license ; procedure.
Appropriation for administration and enforcement.
Weather Modification Districts (General Provisions)
"County court" defined.
Initiative and referendum.
(Incorporation)
Incorporation for weather modification ; limitations as to area.
Forest lands not benefited property ; not included in district except upon petition.
Time for formation election.
Commissioners of first board : qualifications.
Certificates of election for commissioners.
(Powers of District)
General powers of district.
Limitation on right to own or operate equipment.
Regulations concerning district property.
Duty to carry liability insurance.
Cooperative agreements between districts.
Tax assessment, levy and collection.
Disposal of taxes levied when organization declared invalid.
Employes' retirement system authorized.
1 ustrict to budget for retirement system.
Employee contribution.
Limitation on membership.
(Board of Commissioners)
Powers of district in board ; qualifications, terms and election of commissioners.
Board meeting ; officers ; quorum ; employing assistance : employee benefits.
Increasing number of commissioners.
Deposit and withdrawal of moneys ; annual reports ; records.
Calling special elections.
Penalties
Penalties.
Licensing
558.010 Definitions for ORS 558.010 to 558.11,0. As used in ORS 55S.010 to
558.140 and 558.090 :
(1) "Department" means the State Department of Agriculture.
(2) "Person" includes any public or private corporation. [1053 c.654 s.l : 1055
c.61 s.4]
558.020 Purpose of ORS 558.010 to 558.11,0 and 558.990. The purpose of ORS
558.010 to 558.140 and 558.990 is to promote the public health, safety and well are
by providing for the licensing, regulation and control of interference by artificial
means with the natural precipitation of rain, snow, hail, moisture or water in any
form contained in the atmosphere. ri953 c.654 s.2]
558.030 Artificial weather modification prohibited without license. Xo person,
without securing a license from the department, shall cause or attempt to cause
by artificial means condensation or precipitation of rain, snow. hail, moisture or
water in any form contained in the atmosphere, or shall prevent or attempt to
prevent by artificial means the natural condensation or precipitation of rain,
snow, hail, moisture or water in any form contained in the atmosphere. [1053
c.654 s.3]
558.01,0 Application for license; fee. (1) Any person desiring to do any of the
acts specified in ORS 558.030 shall file with the department an application for a
license on a form to be supplied by the department for such purpose setting forth
All of the following :
(a) The name and post-office address of the applicant.
(b) The education, experience and qualifications of the applicant, or if the
applicant is not an individual, the education, experience and qualifications of
the persons who will be in control and in charge of the operation of the
applicant.
(c) The name and post-office address of the person on whose behalf the
weather modification operation is to be conducted if other than the applicant.
593
(d) The nature and object of the weather modification operation which
applicant proposes to conduct, including a general description of such opera-
tion and the manner in which the production, management or conservation
of water or energy resources or agricultural or forest crops could be benefited
by the operation.
(e) The method and type of equipment and the type and composition of
the materials that the applicant proposes to use.
(f) Such other pertinent information as the department may require.
(2) Each application shall be accompanied by a filing fee in the sum of $100,
and proof of financial responsibility as required by ORS 558.050. [1953 c.654 s.4 ;
1975 c.420 s.l]
558.050 Applicant to file proof of financial responsibility. (1) No license shall
be issued to any person until he has filed with the department proof of ability to
respond in damages for liability on account of accidents arising out of the
weather modification operations to be conducted by him in the amount of $100,000
because of bodily injury to or death of one person resulting from any one acci-
dent, and, subject to said limit for one person, in the amount of $300,000 because
of bodily injury to or death of two or more persons resulting from any one acci-
dent, and in the amount of $300,000 because of injury to or destruction of proper-
ty of others resulting from any one accident.
(2) Proof of financial responsibility may be given by filing with the depart-
ment a certificate of insurance or a bond or a certificate of deposit of money in
the same manner and with the same effect as provided by ORS chapter 486. [1953
c.654 s.13; 1975 c.420 s.la]
558.055 Hearing on application for license. Upon receipt of an application for
a license, the department shall fix the time and place for a public hearing on the
application. Such hearing shall be held in the county seat of any county in which
the proposed operation will be conducted. The department shall notify the appli-
cant of the time and place of hearing in sufficient time for the applicant to com-
ply with the notice requirements of ORS 558.080 to 558.100. [1975 c.420 s.3]
558.060 Issuance of license; conditions ; licensee's authority ; use of improper
materials cause for suspension of revocation; renewal. (1) The department shall
act within 30 days, but shall only issue the license upon finding that :
(a) The applicant is qualified to undertake the weather modification opera-
tion proposed in his application ;
(b) The production, management or conservation of water or energy
resources or agricultural or forest crops could be benefited by the proposed
weather modification operation ; and
(c) The proposed weather modification operation would not be injurious to
the public health or safety.
(2) Each such license shall entitle the licensee to conduct the operations
described in the license for one year from the date the license is issued unless the
license is sooner revoked or suspended. The conducting of any weather modifica-
tion operation or the use of any equipment or materials other than those described
in the license shall be cause for revocation or suspension of the license.
(3) The license may be renewed annually by payment of a filing fee in the
sum of $50. If the application for renewal proposes any change in the previously
licensed operation, or if the department determines that the public health or
safety may be adversely affected by continuation of the operation, the department
shall conduct a hearing on the application for renewal. The provisions of ORS
558.055 and 55S.0S0 to 55S.100 shall apply to such hearing. [1953 c.654 s.5 ;
1975 c.420 s.41
558.065 [1965 c.336 s.2 ; repealed by 1967 c.225 s.l (558.066 enacted in lieu of
558.0; 55)]
558.066 Governmental entities conducting weather modification at airport
exempted. The State of Oregon or its agencies, counties, cities, public corpora-
tions or political subdivisions thereof or any person engaged by any of them for
the purpose of removing or dispersing fog, or carrying out or performing any
other weather modification at an airport owned or operated by the State of
Oregon or its agencies, counties, cities, public corporations or political subdi-
visions thereof, are exempt from the provisions of ORS 55S.010 to 55S.140 and
558.990 in respect to such operations at such airport only. [1967 c.225 s.2 (enacted
in lieu of 558.065) 1
558.070 [1953 c.654 s.6 ; repealed by 1975 c.420 s.12]
558.080 Contents of hearing notice. The notice of hearing shall set forth all of
the following:
(1) The name and post-office address of the applicant.
594
(2) The name and post-office address of the person on whose behalf the weather
modification operation is to be conducted if other than the applicant.
(3) The nature and object of the weather modification operation which apppli-
cant proposes to conduct, including a general description of such operation.
(4) The method and type of equipment and the type of composition of the
materials that the applicant proposes to use.
(5) The area in which the approximate time during which the operation will
be conducted.
(6) The area which will be affected by the operation as near as the same may
be determined in advance.
(7) The time and place of the public hearing. [1953 c.654 s.7 ; 1975 c.420 s.5]
558.090 Publication of notice of hearing. The applicant shall cause the notice of
hearing to be published at least once a week for two consecutive weeks in a news-
paper having a general circulation and published within the county wherein the
proposed operation is to be conducted and in which the affected area is located,
or if the proposed operation is to be conducted in more than one county or if the
affected area is located in more than one county or is located in a county other
than the one in which the proposed operation is to be conducted, then such notice
shall be published in like manner in a newspaper having a general circulation and
published within each of such counties. In case there is no newspaper published
within the appropriate county, publication shall be made in a newspaper having
a general circulation within the county. The date of last publication shall be not
less than three nor more than 10 days prior to the date set for hearing. [1953
c.654 s.8 ; 1975 c. 420 s.6]
558.100 Proof of publication. Proof of publication shall be filed by the applicant
with the department at the time of the hearing. Proof of publication shall be by
copy of the notice as published, attached to and made a part of the affidavit of the
publisher or foreman of the newspaper publishing the notice. [1953 c.654 s.9 ; 1975
c.420 s.7]
558.110 Record* and reports of operations ; public examination. (1) Each licen-
see shall keep and maintain a record of all operations conducted by him pursuant
to his license showing the method employed, the type of equipment, the type and
'composition of the materials used, the times and places of operation of the equip-
ment, the name and post-office address of each person participating or assisting in
the operation other than the licensee, the estimated precipitation for each licensed
project, defining the gain or loss occurring from the operations, together with sup-
porting data therefor, and such other information as may be required by the de-
partment, and shall report the same to the department at such times as it may
require.
(2) The records of the department and the reports of all licensees shall be avail-
able for public examination. [1953 c.654 s.10 ; 1975 c.420 s.8]
558.120 Emergency licenses. Notwithstanding any provision of ORS 558.010 to
558.140 and 558.990 to the contrary, the department may grant a license permit-
ting a weather modification operation without compliance by the licensee with the
provisions of ORS 558.055 and 558.080 to 558.100, if the operation appears to the
•department to be necessary or desirable in aid of extinguishment of fires, dis-
persal of fog. or other similar emergency. [1953 c.654 s. 11 ; 1975 c.430 s. 9]
558.130 [1953 c.654 s. 12 ; repealed by 1975 c.420 s.12]
558.135 Revocation, suspension, refusal to issue or renew license; procedure.
CI) Where the department proposes to refuse to issue or renew a license, or pro-
poses to revoke or suspend a license, opportunity for hearing shall be accorded as
provided in ORS 183.310 to 183.500.
(2) Promulgation of rules, conduct of hearings, issuance of orders and judicial
review of rules and orders shall be in accordance with ORS 183.310 to 1S3.500.
[1975 c.420 B.11]
558.1 £0 Appropriation for administration and enforcement. All moneys received
by the department under ORS 558.010 to 558.140 and 558.990. in addition to any
other appropriation of funds available for the administration of ORS 558.010 to
658.1 10 ;iik1 558. 990, hereby are continuously appropriated to the department for
tbo purpose of defraying the costs and expenses incurred in the administration
and enforcement of ORS 558.010 to 558.140 and 558.990. [1955 c.6 s.3]
Weather Modification Districts
(General Provisions)
558.200 "County court" defined. As used in ORS 558.200 to 558.440. "county
court" Includes board of county commissioners. [1969 c. 698 s.l]
558.205 Initiative and referendum. In the exercise of initiative and referendum
powers reserved under the Constitution of this state to the legal voters of every
municipality and district as to all local, special and municipal legislation of every
sort and character in and for their respective municipalities and districts, the
general laws of the state as applied to cities and towns shall govern in these
districts. The chairman of the commissioners shall act as mayor and perform his
duties, the secretary shall perform the duties of auditor or recorder, the attorney
shall perform the duties of city attorney, and if there is no attorney, the secretary
shall perform the duties required of the attorney. [1969 c.698 s.35 ; 1975 c.647 s.47]
(Incorporation)
558.210 Incorporation for weather modification ; limitations as to area. Any
designated area within a county bordering the Columbia River and having a
population of less than 21.000, according to the latest federal decennial census,
or within two or more of such counties, may be incorporated as a weather niodifi-
cati< »n district for the purpose of :
(1) Causing or attempting to cause by artificial means condensation or precip-
itation of rain, snow, hail, moisture or water in any form contained in the
atmosphere ; or
(2) Preventing or attempting to prevent by artificial means the natural con-
densation or precipitation of rain. snow, hail, moisture or water in any form
contained in the atmosphere. [1969 c.698 s.3]
55S.215[1969 c.698 s.4 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
538.220 [1969 c. 698 s.17 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.225 [1969 c.698 s.5 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.230[1969 c.698 s.6a ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.235 Forest lands not benefited properly: not included in district except
upon petition. Forest lands within a forest protection district as defined in ORS
chapter 477, shall not be considered benefited property and shall not be included
in a weather modification district unless the owner of the forest lands petitions*
the county court having jurisdiction of the formation proceedings to have his
lands included. [1969 c.698 s.6 ; 1971 c.727 s.173]
55S.240[1969 c.698 s.20 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558:245 Time for formation election. An election, if any is held, on formation
shall be held at the same time as the next succeeding state-wide primary or
general election. [1969 c.698 s.7 ; 1971 c.727 s.175]
558.250[1969 c.698 s.8 ; repealed by 1971 c.647 s.149]
558.255 Commissioners of first board; qualifications. At the election on forma-
tion, commissioners to serve as the first board of the district shall be elected.
Commissioners shall be owners of the land within the district but need not reside
within the district. [1969 c.698 s.9 : 1971 c.647 s.125]
558.260 [1969 c.698 ss.10, 11, 12, 16 : repealed by 1971 c.647 s.149]
">S.265[1969 c.698 s.13 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.270 Certificates of election for commissioners. The county court shall also
canvass the votes for commissioners and cause the county clerk to issue certifi-
cates of election to the number named in the petition for formation who received
the highest number of votes. [1969 c.698 s.14]
558,275[1969 c.698 s.15 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
(Powers of District)
558.300 General powers of district. After the date of formation, a district shall
make all contracts, hold and receive and dispose of real and personal property
within and without its described boundaries and do all other acts and things
which may be requisite, necessary or convenient in carrying out the objects of
the district or exercising the powers conferred upon it as in ORS 558.200 to
558.440 set out and expressed, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded in all
actions and suits or other proceedings brought bv or against it. [1969 c.698 s.18;
1971 c.727 s.177]
558.310 Limitation on right to own or operate equipment. No weather modifi-
cation district shall own or operate airplanes, chemicals or other equipment or
appliances for weather modification activities, but must when conducting
weather modification activities hire a person licensed under the provisions of
ORS 558.010 to 558.140 and 588.990. [1969 c.698 s.60]
558.315 Regulations concerning district property. Any weather modification dis-
trict may adopt and promulgate rules and regulations concerning the use of the
property of the district. [1969 c.698 s.27]
596
558.320, Duty to carry liability insurance. A weather modification distrcit shall
obtain not later than the 60th day after the date of the election forming such
district and before beginning any weather modification activities liability insur-
ance coverage of not less than $500,000 bodly injury and $500,000 property dam-
age, to reimburse persons for damages arising from weather modification ac-
tivities. [1960 c.69S s.61]
558.325 Cooperative agreements between districts. Weather modification dis-
tricts organized under ORS 558.200 to 558.440 may enter into cooperative agree-
ments or control of facilities for weather modification. [1969 c.698 s.28]
558.330[1969 c.698 s.40; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.340 Tax assessment, levy and collection. (1) The district may assess, levy
and collect taxes each year not to exceed one-fourth of one percent (.0025) of
the true cash value of all taxable property within the limits of the district,
computed in accordance with ORS 308.207. The proceeds the tax shall be applied
by it in carrying out the objects and purposes of ORS 558.210 to 588.270, 558,300
and 558.345 and for the purpose of financing the employes' retirement system.
(2) Any such taxes needed shall be levied in each year and returned to the
county officer whose duty it is to extend the tax roll by the time required by law
for city taxes to be levied and returned.
(3) All taxes levied by the district shall become payable at the same time and
be collected by the same officer who collects county taxes, and shall be turned
over to the district according to law. The county officer whose duty it is to
extend the county levy shall extend the levy of the district in the same manner
as city taxes are extended.
(4) Property shall be subject to sale for nonpayment of taxes levied by the
district in like manner and with like effect as in the case of county and state
taxes. [1969 c.698 s.26 ; 1971 c.727 s.178]
558.345 Disposal of taxes levied when organization declared invalid. When an
attempt has been made to organize a district under the provisions of ORS 558.200
to :~5S.440 and subsequently by a decree of a court of competent jurisdiction it
has been declared that the organization is invalid, but prior to such decree the
invalid organization has levied taxes, the funds derived from the levy shall be
disposed of as follows :
(1) If the area embraced in the invalid organization is embraced in a subse-
quently created organization composed of unincorporated or incorporated terri-
tory, or combinations thereof, for the purpose of weather modification, the cus-
todian of the taxes collected for the invalid organization shall turn them over
to the subsequent organization to be used only for the purpose of weather
modification.
(2) If the subsequent organization does not embrace all territory embraced in
the invalid organization, such taxes as have been collected from the levy upon
property in areas not embraced in the subsequent organization shall be refunded
to the payers thereof by the custodian of the taxes before the balance is turned
over to the subsequent organization.
(3) If no such subsequent organization is created for weather modification,
within a period of two years after the entry of the decree of invalidation, the
taxes collected shall be refunded by the custodian of them to the taxpayers who
paid them. [1969 c.698 s.19]
558.850 Employes' retirement system authorized. (1) A weather modification
district organized under ORS 558.200 to 558.440 may establish an employes' re-
tirement system. The commissioners may enter into agreements necessary to
establish the system and carry out the plan and may agree to modifications of
such agreements from time to time.
(2) The retirement plan may provide for retirement benefits measured on the
basis of services rendered or to be rendered by an employe, either before or after
the date on which such employe first becomes a member of the retirement plan.
The retirement plan may provide for a minimum of years of service and a mini-
mum and maximum age of retirement for the employe. [1969 c.OOX s.561
558.355 District to budget for retirement system. The district may budget and
provide for payment info the fund of the retirement plan an amount sufficient:
(3 ) To provide on an actuarial reserve basis the amortized level premium cost
o'* Hie retirement benefits which, under the provision of the retirement system,
arc to be provided by the district to its employes who attain the retirement age
Or retire in accordance with the terms of the retirement plan.
C2) To meet the actuarially computed costs of retirement benefits measured
on the basis of services rendered or to be rendered by an employe before or after
597
the date on which such employe becomes a member of the retirement plan. [1969
c.698 s.57]
558.360 Employee contribution. The district may collect, as a contribution from
any employe, that percentage of the salary received by the employe which is
necessary to fund on an actuarial reserve basis the cost of retirement benefits
which the employe is required to provide pursuant to the provisions of a retire-
ment plan. [1969 c.698 s.58]
558.365 Limitation on membership. Nothing in ORS 558.200 to 558.440 author-
izes the district to budget, provide for payments or collect contributions to fund
retirement benefits for an individual who is not in the employment of the district
at the time of the creation of a membership status under a retirement plan. [1969
c.698 s.59]
(Board of Commissioners)
558400 Powers of district in board; qualifications, terms and election of com-
missioners. (1) The power and authority given to districts organized under ORS
558.200 to 558.440 except as therein otherwise provided is vested in and shall be
exercised by a board of commissioners of the number named in the petition for
formation, but not more than five, each of whom shall be a qualified voter and
freeholder within the district. Except as provided in subsection (2) of this
section, directors shall serve for four-year terms.
(2) Within 10 days after issuance of the formation order, the number of com-
missioners named in the petition for formation who received the highest vote
at the election for formation shall meet and organize, first taking and subscribing
an oath of office to the effect that they will support the Constitutions of the
United States and of this state and the laws thereof, and will discharge faithfully
the duties of commissioner to the best of their ability. They shall determine by
lot the length of term each shall hold office. If there is an odd number of com-
missioners, a majority shall have a term expiring four years after the July 1
immediately following the election and a minority shall have a term expiring
two years after the July 1 immediately following the election. If there is an even
number of commissioners, the commissioners shall be divided into two equal
groups as to terms. One group shall have a term expiring four years after the
July 1 immediately following the election and the other group shall have a term
expiring two years after the July 1 immediately following the election.
(3) A general election shall be held in the district, on the date fixed by ORS
259.240, for the election of a commissioner to succeed a commissioner whose term
expires the following July 1, and to elect commissioners to fill any vacancy which
then may exist. At all elections the voters shall have the qualifications of electors
of this state and shall have resided in the territory embraced in the district for
at least 90 days preceding the election. [1969 c.698 s.29; 1971 c.727 s.179; 1973
c.796 s.71 : 1975 c.647 s.48]
558.405 [1969 c.698 s.33 ; repealed by 1971 c.23 s.12]
558.JflO Board meetings; officers; quorum; employing assistance; employe
benefits. (1) The commissioners shall hold meetings at such time and place
within the district as they may determine upon. Such meetings must be open to
the public. They shall hold at least one regular meeting in each month on a day
to be fixed by them, and may hold special meetings under such rules as they may
make.
(2) The commissioners shall, at the time of their organization, choose from
their number a chairman, a secretary and a treasurer, who shall hold their offices
until the first regular meeting in July, or until their successors are elected and
qualified. These officers shall have, respectively, the powers and shall perform
the duties usual in such cases and shall be known as the president, secretary and
treasurer of the district. A majority shall constitute a quorum to do business
and, in the absence of the chairman, any other member may preside at any
meeting.
(3) The commissioners may employ such engineers, superintendents, mechan-
ics, clerks or other persons as they may find requisite, necessary or convenient
in carrying on any work of the district and at such rate of remuneration
as they may deem just.
(4) The commissioners may provide life insurance and retirement or pension
plans for employees of a weather modification district, provided the insurer
issuing such policy is licensed to do business in the State of Oregon. [1969 c.698
s.31 : 1971 c.23 s.ll ; 1971 c.403 s.13 ; 1973 c.796 s.72]
558.415 Increasing number of commissioners. (1) If the numbers of commis-
sioners in a particular district is less than five. then, upon receipt of petitions
containing the names of not less than 25 electors in the district and requesting
598
that an election be held iu the district on the proposition of increasing the num-
ber of commissioners to five and nominating a candidate or candidates for each
additional position, each of whom shall be a qualified voter and freeholder
within the district, the commissioners may, at their discretion, call a special
election of the electors of the district to vote on the proposition and on the
candidates. The election shall be held in accordance with ORS chapter 259,
If the proposition is approved by a majority of the electors voting at such election,
the number of commissioners named in the petitions requesting the election, who
received the highest vote at the election, shall take office as of the next regular
meeting of commissioners following the election, after first taking and subscrib-
ing the oath of office.
(2) If only one additional commissioner is so elected his first term shall be four
years if immediately before the election there was an even number of commis-
sioners or two years if immediately before the election there was an odd number
of commissioners. If more than one additional commissioner is so elected, the
newly elected commissioners shall at such meeting determine by lot the length of
term each shall hold office in a manner so as to comply with subsection (2) of
ORS 558.400.
[1969 c.698 s.32 : 1973 c.796 s.73 : 1975 c.647 s.49]
558.420[1969 c.698 s.34 ; repealed by 1971 c.23 s.12]
558430 Deposit and withdrawal of moneys; annual reports; records. (1) All
moneys of the district shall be deposited in one or more banks, to be designated
by the commissioners ; and shall be withdrawn or paid out only when previously
ordered by vote of the commissioners, and upon checks signed by the treasurer
and countersigned by the chairman, or in his absence or inability to act, by the
secretary. A receipt or voucher, showing clearly the nature and items covered by
each check drawn, shall be kept on file.
(2) Annual reports shall be made and filed by the chairman, secretary and
treasurer, and at least once in each year a full and complete itemized statement
of receipts and expenditures shall be published in a newspaper of general circu-
lation, published in the county in which the district is situate.
(3) All the proceedings of the commissioners shall be entered at large in a
record book. All books, maps, plans, documents, correspondence, vouchers, re-
ports and other papers and records pertaining to the business of the district shall
be carefully preserved and shall be open to inspection as public records in the
office of the county clerk of the county in which the greater part of the district
is located. [1969 c.698 s.36]
558440 Calling special elections. The commissioners at any regular meeting
of the board of commissioners may call a special election of the electors of the
district. Such an election must be held at the same time as the next succeeding
state-wide primary or general election. [1969 c.698 s.30 ; 1971 c.647 s.128]
558.445 [1969 c.698 s.2 ; repealed by 1971 c.647 s.149]
558.500 [1969 c.698 s.37 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.510 [1969 c.698 s. 38 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.520 [1969 c.698 s.39 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.550[1969 c.698 s.48 : repealed by 1971 c.727 s.2031
558.555 [1969 c.698 s.49 ; repealed bv 1971 c.727 s.203 1
558.560[1969 c.698 s.50 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.565 [1969 c.698 s.51 : repealed by 1971 c727 s.203]
558. 570 [1969 c.698 s.52 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.575[1969 c.698 S.53 ; repealed bv 1971 c.647 s.149]
558.580 [1969 c.698 s.54 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.585[1969 c.698 S.55 ; repealed bv 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.600[1969 c.698 s.41 ; repealed bv 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.610[1969 c.698 s.42 : repealed bv 11)71 c.727 s.203]
558.620[1969 c. 698 s.43 ; repealed bv 1971 c.727 s.203]
558.630[1969 C.698 s.44 : repealed by 1971 c.727 s.2031
558.6501 1969 c.698 s.45 ; repealed by 1971 c.727 s.203]
55S.(>00[ 19(19 c.698 s.46 : repealed by 1971 c.727 s.191]
558.670[1969 c.698 s.47 ; repealed by 1971 c.27 s.203]
Penalties
558.990 Penalties. Any person who violates any provision of ORS 558.010 to
558.140 and 558.990 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
[1953 c.654 s.14]
599
General Provisions
450.010 Establishing master plans and service districts. (1) Master plans
and service districts may be established as provided by this chapter regarding:
(a) Sewage works, including all facilities necessary for collecting, pump-
ing, treating and disposing of sanitary or storm sewage.
(b) Drainage works, including all facilities necessary for collecting,,
pumping and disposing of storm and surface water.
(c) Street lighting works, including all facilities necessary for the light-
ing of streets and highways.
(d) Public parks and recreation facilities, including land, structures, equip-
ment, supplies, and personnel necessary to acquire, develop, and maintain
such public park and recreation facilities and to administer a program in
supervised recreation services.
(e) Diking and flood control works, including all facilities necessary for
diking and control of water courses.
(f ) Water supply works, including all facilities necessary for tapping nat-
ural sources of domestic and industrial water, treating and protecting the
quality of the water and transmitting it to the point of sale to any city,
domestic water supply corporation or other public or private agency for ulti-
mate distribution by the city, corporation or agency to water users.
(g) Solid waste disposal. This paragraph does not apply in Clackamas,
Multnomah and Washington Counties.
(h) Public transportation, including public depots, public parking and
the motor vehicles and other equipment necessary for the transportation
of persons together with their personal property.
(i) Agricultural educational extension services.
(2) Within the geographical jurisdiction of any local government boundary
commission established by or pursuant to ORS 199.410 to 199.512, master plans
and service districts may be established as provided by this chapter regarding;
(a) Fire prevention and protection-
CD) Enhanced law enforcement services provided by contract with the
sheriff of the county.
(c) Domestic, municipal and industrial water supply service.
(d) Hospital and ambulance services.
(e) Library services.
(f ) Vector control.
(g) Cemetery maintenance.
(h) Roads.
(i) Weather modification. [1963 c.515 s.2 ; 1965 c.246 s.l : 1967 c.538 s.l ;
1971 c.674 s.l ; 1971 c.687 s.l ; 1973 c.211 s.l ; 1973 c.785 s.l ; 1975 c.630 s.l]
451420 District may construct and operate service facilities. When author-
ized as provided in ORS 451.410 to 451.600 a district may construct, maintain and
operate any or all of the service facilities specified in ORS 451.010. [1955 c.685
s.2 ; 1963 c.515 s.8 ; 1973 c.785 s.6]
Pennsylvania
Pa. Stat. Ann. Tit. 3, Sec. 1101-1118
Chapter 16 — Weather Modification [New]
Sec.
1101. Declaration of policy.
1102. Definitions.
1103. Weather Modification Board.
1104. Administration by department.
1105. When license registration required.
1106. Application for license.
1107. Reeistration of equipment.
1108. Publication.
1109. Emergencies ; publication.
1110. Records.
1111. Research projects ; safety.
1112. Enforcement.
1113. License suspensions, revocations.
1114. Damage compensation.
1115. Acts not authorized.
1116. Penalties.
1117. Repeal.
1118. Effective date.
GOO
§ 1101. Declaration of policy
The public interest, health, safety, welfare and necessity require that scientific
experimentation in the field of artificial nucleation, and that scientific efforts to
develop and increase natural precipitation of rain, snow, moisture, or water in
any form contained in the atmosphere, within the State, be encouraged in order to
develop, conserve, and protect the natural water resources of the State and to
safeguard life and property. 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, § 1.
%1102. Definitions
As used in this act —
(1) "Board" means the Weather Modification Board.
(2) "Department" means the Department of Agriculture.
(3) "Operation" means the performance of weather modification and control
activities pursuant to a single contract entered into for the purpose of producing,
or attempting to produce, a certain modifying effect within one geographical area
over one continuing time interval not exceeding one year, or, if the performance
of weather modification and control activities is to be undertaken individually or
jointly by a person or persons to be benefited and not undertaken pursuant to a
contract, "operation" means the performance of weather modification and control
activities entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempting to produce, a
certain modifying effect within one geographical area over one continuing time
interval not exceeding one year.
(-1) "Person" means any individual, firm, association, organization, partner-
ship, company, corporation, private or public, political subdivision, or other
public agency.
(5) "Research and development" means theoretical analysis, exploration and
experimentation and the extension of investigative findings and theories of a
scientific or technical nature into practical application for experimental and
demonstration purposes, including the experimental production and testing
of models devices, equipment, materials and processes.
(6) "Weather modification and control" meaus changing or controlling, or at-
tempting to change or control, by artificial methods the natural development of
any or all atmospheric cloud forms and precipitation forms which occur in the
troposphere. 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, § 2.
Library references : Agriculture C^>1. C.J.S. Agriculture § 1 et seq.
§ 1103. Weather Modification Board1
(a) There is hereby created within the department a Weather Modification
Board. Such advisory board shall be composed of seven members who shall be :
(1) The Secretary of Agriculture.
(2) The Secretary of Commerce.
(3) The Secretary of Health.
(4) The Dean of the College of Earth Sciences at the Pennsylvania State
University.
(5) Three members to be appointed by the Governor with the advice and
consent of the Senate.
(b) Terms of all appointed members shall be for four years. Appointed members
shall receive the sum of thirty dollars ($30) per day for each day or part thereof
devoted to the committee's activities. 1968, Jan. 18, P.L. (1967) 1024, § 1 et seq.
§ 110'/. Administration by department
The department shall administer this act and in so doing shall ask for and con-
sider the recommendations of the board herein created which shall advise on all
the matters regulated by this act. 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, §4.
Library references : Agriculture C=>1. C.J.S. Agriculture § 1 et seq.
§ 1105. When license registration required
(a) No person, without first securing a license from the department, shall cause
or attempt to cause condensation or precipitation oc rain, snow, moisture, or water
in any form contained in the atmosphere.
(bj No person without registering with the board shall have in his possession
any cloud seeding equipment unless he is an employe of or under contract with a
person conducting a weather modification and control operation who has been
granted a license by the board. 1908, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, § ;"».
Library references: Licenses C=>11(1). C.J.S. Licenses §26 et seq. P.L.E.
Licenses § 8.
» Enrolled bill roads "Advisory Committee on Cloud Seeding".
601
§ HOG. Application for license
(a) Any person desiring to do any of the acts specified in section 51 may file
witli the board an application in writing for a license. Each application shall be
accompanied by a filing fee fixed by the board but not to exceed one hundred
dollars ($100), and shall be on a form to be supplied for such purpose by the
board.
(b) Every application shall set forth all of the following :
(1) The name and post-office address of the applicant.
(2) The previous education, experience, and qualifications of the applicant,
or, if the applicant is other than an individual, the previous education,
experience, and qualifications of the persons who will be in control of and
charged with the operations of the applicant. Previous experience includes
sub-contracting or counseling services.
(3) A general description of the operations which the applicant intends to
conduct and the method and type of equipment including all nucleating
agents, that the applicant proposes to use. Aircraft must be listed by numbers
and pilots' names.
(4) A statement listing all employes, who are residents of Pennsylvania,
and/or who will be directly employed in the intended operation.
(5) A bond or insurance covering any damage the licensee may cause
through his operations in an amount of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) or
other evidence of financial responsibility shall be furnished and executed
• at the time of the grant of the license.
(6) Every applicant shall have a resident agent within the Commonwealth.
(c) Upon the filing of the application upon a form supplied by the board and
containing the information prescribed by this act and accompanied by the required
filing fee and bond or insurance, the board may issue a license to the applicant
entitling the applicant to conduct the operations described in the application for
the calendar year for which the license is issued, unless the license is sooner
revoked or suspended or modified.
(d) A license may be renewed annually upon application to the board,
accompanied by a renewal fee fixed by the board but not to exceed one hundred
dollars ($100) , on or before the last day of January of the calendar year for which
the license is renewed. 196S, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, § 6.
Library references : Licenses Q^>22. C.J.S. Licenses §§ 34, 38, 39. P.L.E. Licenses
§16.
§ 1107. Registration of equipment
Every person not desiring a license who owns or possesses cloud seeding equip-
ment shall promptly register the same with the board on a form furnished by it.
1968. Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, § 7.
Library references : Licenses <&z>24. C.J.S. Licenses § 41. P.L.E. Licenses § 16.
§ 1108. PuUication
(a) Prior to undertaking any operation authorized by the license, the licensee
shall file with the department and cause to be published a notice of intention. The
licensee shall then confine his activities for that operation substantially within the
time and area limits set forth in the notice of intention.
(b) The notice of intention shall set forth all of the following :
(1) The name and address of the licensee.
(2) The nature and object of the intended operation and the person or
persons on whose behalf it is to be conducted.
(3) The area in which and the approximate time during which the opera-
tion will be conducted.
(4) The area which will be affected by the operation as near as the same
may be determined in advance.
(c) The licensee shall cause the notice of intention to be published once a week
for three successive weeks in a newspaper having a general circulation and pub-
lished within any county wherein the operation is to be conducted and in which
the affected area is located, or, if the operation is to be conducted in more than
one -com: tv or if the affected area is located in more than one county or is located
in a county other than the one in Which the operation is to be conducted, then such
notice shall be published in like manner in a newspaper having a general cir-
culation and published within each of such counties. In case there is no newspaper
published within the appropriate county, publication shall be made in a newspaper
having a general circulation within the county.
1 Section 1105 of this title.
602
(d) Proof of publication shall be filed by the licensee with the department
within fifteen days from the date of the last publication of the notice. Proof of
publication shall be by copy of the notice as published atached to and made a part
of the affidavit of the publisher or foreman of the newspaper publishing the
notice. 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, § 8.
Library references : Licenses 0=^22. C.J.S. Licenses §§ 34, 38, 39. P.L.E. Licenses
§ 16.
§1109. Emergencies; publication
(a) Notwithstanding any provision of this act to the contrary, the board may
grant a licensee permission to undertake an emergency nucleation project, with-
out prior compliance by the licensee with the provisions of section 8(a),1 if the
same appears to the department to be necessary or desirable in aid of extinguish-
ment of tires.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision of this act to the contrary, upon request of
the county commissioners, of a county or of the governing body of a city, borough,
town or tow nships, and upon the submission of such supporting evidence as the
board may require, the board may grant a licensee permission to undertake a
nucleation project for the purpose of alleviating a drought emergency, without
prior compliance by the licensee with the provisions of section 8(a) requiring
publication of notice of intention, if such project appears to the department to
Jbe necessary or desirable.
(o Nothing contained in this section shall be construed as to relieve the li-
censee in the cases set forth in subsection (a) or (b) of this section from com-
pliance with the provisions of section 8 requiring publication of notice of inten-
tion and riling of proof of such publication, as soon after the granting of permis-
sion by the board as is practicable. In lieu thereof the licensee may furnish equiv-
alent transmission of notice of intention by radio or television, and prof thereof,
as soon after the granting of permission by the board as is practicable. 1968, Jan.
19. P.L. (1967) 1024, §9.
Library references : Licenses <3=^22. C.J.S. Licenses §§ 34, 38, 39. P.L.E. Licenses
|16.
$1110. Accords
(a) Every licensee shall keep and maintain a record of all operations con-
ducted by him pursuant to his license showing the method employed, the type of
equipment used, the times and places of operation of the equipment, the names and
post office address of each person participating or assisting in the operation other
than the licensee, and such other information as may be required by the board,
and shall report the same to the board immediately upon the completion of each
operation.
(b) Each licensee shall further prepare and maintain an evaluation statement
for each operation which shall include a report as to estimated precipitation, defin-
ing the gain or loss occurring from nucleation activities, together with supporting
data therefor. This statement, together with such other pertinent information as
tbe board may require, shall be sent to the board upon completion and be avail-
able to inspection by the board at all times on the licensee's premises.
(ci The board shall require written reports concerning each operation con-
ducted by a licensee under this act.
i d ) All information on an operation shall be submitted to the board before any
information on such operation may be released to the public.
(e) The reports and records in the custody of the board shall be open for public
examination as public documents. 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, §10.
Library references: Licenses C^> 36. C.J.S. Licenses §42. P.L.E. Licenses §36.
§ ////. Research projects: safety
(ii) Research work within the province of this statute shall be permitted only
when authorized by the board.
(In Government and armed forces projects within the province of this statute
must meet all the requirements of this act.
(c) No nucleating agent may be used in concentrations dangerous to man or
causes environmental pollution as determined bv the State Department of Health.
L968, Jan. 1!>. P.L. (1967) 1024, §11.
Library references: Agriculture Ol. C.J.S. Agriculture § 1 et seq.
§ It 12. Enforcement
In order to enforce the provisions of this act, the Pennsylvania State Police
i Section 1108 of tliis title.
603
shall, on request of the board, assign at least one trooper and one investigator
to an area where unlawful cloud seeding is suspected. If such police request the
same, the Pennsylvania Aeronautics Commission shall assign an airplane and
pilot. Air samples shall be taken by the Pennsylvania Air Pollution Commission if
requested by the State Police or the board. For such enforcement purposes, the
State Department of Health shall furnish such technical services as the board
may request. 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, § 12.
§ 111S. License suspensions, revocations
Any license may be revoked, suspended or modified if the board finds, after due
notice to the licensee and a hearing thereon, that the licensee has failed or re-
fused to comply with any of the provisions of this act. The proceedings herein
referred to shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the act of
June 4, 1945 (P.L. 1388). known as the "Administrative Agency Law,"1 and the
board shall have all the powers granted therein. 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024,
§13.
Library references: Licenses 3S. C.J.S. Licenses §§43, 44. P.L.E. Licenses
§26.
§ 1114. Damage compensation
Any licensee who causes a drought as determined by the board shall compen-
sate farmers for damages. Any licensee who by causing heavy downpours or
storms which cause damage to lands as determined by the board shall com-
pensate farmers and property owners for such damages. 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967)
1024, § 14.
Library references : Agriculture C=> 1. C.J.S. Agriculture § 1 et seq.
§ 1115. Acts not authorized
(a) Nothing contained in this act shall authorize any person to carry out a
cloud seeding operation from Pennsylvania to seed in another state where such
cloud seeding is prohibited.
(b) Nothing contained in this act shall be construed to authorize the suppres-
sion of lightning. 1968. Jan. 19. P.L. (1967 | . 1024, § 15.
Library references : Agriculture C=> 1. C.J.S. Agriculture § 1 et seq.
§ 1116. Penalties
.(a) Any airplane pilot who flies an airplane with numbers invisible to escape
identification under this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon convic-
tion thereof, have his license revoked for a period of five years.
(b) Any airport owner or operator who boards cloud seeding planes to seed
clouds or who operates as a cloud seeder without a license shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof have his airport permit revoked for
one year and be sentenced to pay a fine of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) and
for a second or subsequent offense, he shall be sentenced to pay a fine of fiftv
thousand dollars ($50,000).
(c) Any person knowingly having in his possession without registering the
same with the department any cloud seeding equipment shall, on conviction
thereof, be sentenced to pay a fine of ten thousand dollars ($10.000) .
(d) Any person who makes any false statement to secure a license under
this act shall. 011 conviction thereof, have his license revoked permanently.
ie> Any person who violates any other provision of this act is guilty of a
misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction thereof, be sentenced to pay a fine not
exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) or undergo imprisonment for not
exceeding one year, or both. 1968. Jan. 19. P.L. (1967) 1024. § 16.
Library references: Aviation 123. C.J.S. Aerial Navigation §§ 11, 16. P.L.E.
Aeronautics § 1.
§ 1117. Repeal
The act of November 9. 1965 (P.L. 677), entitled "An act prohibiting certain
weather modification activities whenever the county commissioners shall adopt
a resolution stating that such action is detrimental to the welfare of the county,
and providing penalties." is repealed." 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, §17.
Library references: Agriculture <D=> 1. C.J.S. Agriculture § 1 et seq.
§ 1118. Effective date
This act shall take effect immediately. 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 1024, § 18.
1 71 P.S. § 1710.1 et seq.
3 18 P.S. §§ 3S71 to 3874.
604
South Dakota
S.D. Compiled Laws Ann. Sees. 38-9-1-38-9-22; 1-40-8; 10-12-18
1-^0-8. Administrative functions performed for weather modification com-
mission.— Except as provided by §38-9-4.1, the department of natural resource
development shall, under the direction and control of the secretary of natural
resource development, perform all administrative functions except special
budgetary functions (as defined in §1-32-1) of the weather modification
commission.
Chapter 3S-9 — Weather Modification Activities
Sec.
3&-9-I. Definition of terms.
38-9-3. Policy and purpose of regulation.
38-9-4. Weather modification commission established — Composition.
3S-9-4.1. Direction and supervision by department of natural resource development —
Independent functions retained by commission.
38-9-5. Areas from which members of commission appointed.
38-9-6. Repealed.
3S-9-9. Operations and research activities.
38-9-10.1. Utilization of technical resources of schools.
38-9-11.1. Co-operation with counties — County participation.
38-9-12. License and permit required to engage in Aveather modification — Violation of
terms unlawful.
38-9-12.1. Exemption of experimental and emergency activities.
38-9-13. Repealed.
38-9-14. Issuance of license to competent applicant — Competence of organization —
Application fee.
3S-9-15. Fee required on issuance or renewal of license — Disposition.
38-9-10, 38-9-17. Repealed.
38-9—18. Expiration of licenses.
38-9-1S.1. Issuance of renewal license.
38-9-1S.2. Permits issued to licensees — Fee — Publication of notice of intention — Finan-
cial responsibility.
3S-9-18.3. Means of proving financial responsibility.
38-9-18.4. Permit fee — Disposition.
38-9-18.5. Permit required for each operation — Maximum duration of permit.
38-9-19. Suspension, revocation, refusal or refusal to renew license or permit.
38—9—19.1. Modification of permit- — Notice and hearing.
38-9-21. Unlicensed weather modification activity as misdemeanor — Penalty.
3S-9-22. Administration by department — Powers retained by commission.
38-9-23. Repealed.
3S-9-1. Definition of terms. — As used in this chapter :
(1) The term "weather modification" means performing any activity with the
int . 'nt ion of producing artifical changes in the composition, behavior, or dynamics
of the atmosphere.
(2) and (3) * * * [Same as parent volume.]
(4) The term "operation" means the performance of weather modification
activities entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempting to produce, a
certain modifying effect within one geographical area over one continuing time
interval not exceeding one yea»\
38-9-3. Policy and purpose of regulations. — It is hereby declared that weather
modification techniques for precipitation management should be used to aug-
ment precipitation and decrease hailfall damage in South Dakota. The applica-
tion of weather modification techniques shall be carried out under proper safe-
guards to supply sufficient data and accurate information in order to provide
a net economic benefit and enhance knowledge concerning weather modification
and to protect life, property and the public interest.
38-9-J/. Weather modification commission established — Composition. — There
is hereby established a weather modification commission, hereinafter called the
commission composed of seven representatives, one from each area designated by
§ 38-9-5, to be appointed biennially by the Governor on July first and provided
further, no more than four shall be from any one political party.
38-9'/. J. Direction and supervision by department of natural resource de-
velopment— Independent functions retained by commission. — The weather modi-
fication commission shall be administered under the direction and supervision
of the department of natural resource development and the secretary thereof, but
shall retain the quasi-judicial, quasi-legislative, advisory, other nonadministra-
tive and special budgetary functions (as defined in §1-32-1) otherwise vested
in it and shall exercise tbosp functions independently of the secretary of natural
resource development. The commission shall also retain the function pf setting
the te rms of and approving the contracts with otber units of government for the
sharing of the costs of weather modification operations.
605
88-9-5. Areas from, which members of commission appointed. — Representa-
tives of the commission shall be appointed from areas containing the following
counties :
Area I — Bennett, Custer, Fall River, Haakon, Jackson, Pennington, Shannon
and Washabaugh; Area II — Butte, Harding, Lawrence, Meade and Perkins;
.Area III — Campbell, Corson, Dewey, Hughes, Potter, Stanley, Sully, Walworth
and Ziebach ; Area IV — Aurora, Brule, Buffalo, Charles Mix, Davison, Douglas,
Gregory, Jerauld, Jones, Lyman, Mellette, Sanborn, Todd and Tripp; Area V^-
Bon Homme, Clay, Hanson, Hutchinson, Lake, Lincoln, MeCook, Miner, Minne-
haha, Moody, Turner, Union and Yankton ; Area VI — Beadle, Brown, Edmunds,
Faulk, Hand, Hyde, McPherson and Spink ; Area VII — Brookings, Clark, Cod-
ington, Day. Deuel, Grant, Hamlin, Kingsbury, Marshall and Roberts.
38-9-9. Operations and research activities. — The commission shall carry on
operations and research on a state-wide basis, by its own staff, or by contract
with approved cloud seeding organizations or in co-operation with other agencies
as provided by law.
38-9-10.1. Utilization of technical resources of schools. — Pa carrying out the
purposes of this chapter, the commission shall utilize to the extent possible the
facilities and technical resources of the public and private educational institu-
tions of the state.
38-9-11.1. Co-operation with counties — County participation. — The commis-
sion may, at its discretion, co-operate wuth county programs of weather modifi-
cation in carrying out the purposes of this chapter, and in addition to the powers
of counties specified in § 10-18, counties may contribute to and participate in
any weather modification program carried out by the state.
38-9-12. License and permit required to engage in weather modification —
Violation of terms unlawful. — It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in
activities for weather modification without a weather modification license and
a weather modification permit issued by the commission or in violation of any
term or condition of the license or the permit except as the commission shall
provide by regulation under § 38-9-12.1.
38-9-12.1 Exemption of experimental and emergency activities. — The com-
mission, to the extent it considers exemptions practical, shall provide for ex-
empting laboratory research and experiments and activities of an emergency
nature against fire, frost, sleet or fog from the license and permit requirements
of this chapter.
Source: SL 1973, ch 254, § 10. See Tex Vernon's Civ Code, Art 8280-12, § 8 (2),
(3).
38-9-13. Repealed by SL 1973, ch 254, § 21.
38-9-14- Issuance of license to competent applicant — Competence of organi-
zation— Application fee. — The commission, in accordance with its regulations,
shall issue a weather modification license to each applicant who pays the license
fee and who demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the commission, competence
in the field of meteorology which is reasonably necessary to engage in wTeather
modification activities. If the applicant is an organization, the competence must
be demonstrated by the individual or individuals who are to be in control and
in charge of the operation for the applicant. Each application shall be accom-
panied by a fee of twenty-five dollars.
38-9-15. Fee required on issuance or renewal of license — Disposition. — Any
person issued an original license or a renewal license under this chapter shall pay
a fee of one hundred dollars. The money collected from such fees shall be depos-
ited with the state treasurer in the state general fund.
38-9-16, 38-9-17. Repealed by SL 1973, ch 254, § 21.
38-9-18. Expiration of licenses. — Each original license or renewal license
issued under this chapter shall expire on December thirty-first of the year for
which it was issued.
38-9-18.1. Issuance of renewal license. — At the expiration of the license
period, the commission shall issue a renewal license to each applicant who pays
the license fee and who has the qualifications necessary for issuance of an
original license.
Source : SL 1973, ch 254, § 14.
38-9-18.2. Permits issued to licensees — Fee — Publication of notice of inten-
tion— Financial responsibility. — The commission, in accordance with its regula-
tions, shall issue a weather modification permit to each applicant who holds a
valid weather modification license, pays the permit fee, publishes such notice
of intention as the commission shall require by regulation and submits proof
of publication, and furnishes proof of financial responsibility.
Source : SL 1973, ch 254, § 15.
34-857—79 41
606
38-9-18.3. Means of proving financial responsibility. — Proof of financial re-
sponsibility is made by showing, to the satisfaction of the commission, that the
licensee has the ability to respond in damages for liability which might reason-
ably result from the operation for which the permit is sought.
Source : SL 1973. ch 254, § IS. See Tex Vernon's Civ Code, Art 8280-12, § 14.
38-9-184. Permit fee — Disposition—Any person issued a permit under this
chapter shall pay a fee of one hundred dollars. The money collected from such
fees shall be deposited with the state treasurer in the state general fund.
Source : SL 1973, ch 254, § 16.
38-9-18.5. Permit required for each operation — Maximum duration of per-
mit.— A separate permit is required for each operation. The commission shall
not issue a permit for operations in an area for a period to exceed one year.
Source : SL 1973, ch 254, § 17.
SS-9-19. Suspension, revocation, refusal or refusal to renew license or per-
mit.— The commission may suspend or revoke a license or permit if it appears that
the licensee no longer has the qualifications necessary for the issuance of an
original license or permit or has violated any provision of this chapter. The
commission may refuse to renew the license of, or to issue another permit to,
any applicant who has failed to comply with any provision of this chapter.
38-9-19.1. Modification of permit — Xotiee and hearing. — The commission may
modify the terms and conditions of a permit if the licensee is first given notice
and reasonable opportunity for a hearing on the need for a modification and it
appears to the commission that a modification is necessary to protect the health
or property of any person.
Source : SL 1973, ch 254, § 19. See Tex Vernon's Civ Code, Art 8280-12. § 17(2).
38-9-21. Unlicensed weather modification activity as misdemeanor —
Penalty. — Any person or persons engaging in any type of weather modification
activities without a valid license and permit shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,
and subject to a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in
the county jail for a period not to exceed thirty days, for each such offense.
38-9-22. Administration by department — Powers retained by commission. —
The department of natural resource development shall administer and enforce
the provisions of this chapter, provided, however, that the commission shall
retain the authority and policy powers reserved to it by § 38-9—1.1.
10-12-18. County weather-modification levy authorized — Maximum rate —
Contractors to be licensed. — The board of county commissioners of each county
may levy and collect annually a tax of not to exceed one mill upon assessed
valuation of the property in said county, for a "weather-modification'' fund,
which levy shall lie exclusive of the maximum levy provided by law. The board
of county commissioners of counties which have sixteen million dollars or less
in assessed valuation of property in that county may levy and collect annually
a tax of not to exceed two mills on the assessed valuation of the property in
that county, which levy shall be exclusive of the maximum levy provided by
law. Such fund shall be used only for the gathering of information upon, aiding
in or conducting any program for weather modification, as defined by law. within
said county, or in conjunction with any other county or counties. The provisions
of chapter 7-21, relating to county budgeting shall not apply to appropriations
made under the provisions of this section. Provided, however, that for only the
initial or first appropriation of said "weather-modification"' activities as afore-
mentioned, said county commissioners may, at their discretion, appropriate from
moneys not otherwise appropriated in the general fund, such moneys as are
necessary for carrying out the provisions of this section, provided that said ap-
propriation shall not exceed an amount equal to one mill levy upon the assessed
valuation of the property in said county. The board of county commissioners
shall enter into no contract or agreement for any such purpose except with one
who has been duly licensed under the provisions of chapter 38-9. except for the
purpose of gathering information they may enter into a contract or agreement
with a state agency not licensed.
Texas
Texas Water Code Tit. 2 Sees. 14.001-14.112; Texas Civil Code tit. 120A, Sec.
6889-7(16)
Weather Modification
Sec. If). The Division of Disaster Emergency Services shall keep continuously
apprised of weather conditions which present danger of precipitation or other
climatic activity severe enough to constitute a disaster. If the division determines
607
that precipitation that may result from weather modification operations, either
by itself or in conjunction with other precipitation or climatic conditions or
activity, would create or contribute to the severity of a disaster, it shall request
in the name of the governor that the officer or agency empowered to issue per-
mits for weather modification operations suspend the issuance of the permits.
On the governor's request, no permits may be issued until the division informs
the officer or agency that the danger has passed.
Chapter 14. Weather Modification
Subchapter A. General Provisions
Sec.
14.001. Short Title.
14.002. Definitions.
[Sections 14.003 to 14.010 reserved for expansion]
Subchapter B. Powers and Duties of Board
14.011. Regulations — In General.
14.012. Regulations — Licenses and Permits.
14.013. Regulations — Safety.
14.014. Studies ; Investigations ; Hearings.
14.015. Advisory Committees.
14.016. Personnel.
14.017. Materials and Equipment.
14.01S. Interstate Compacts.
14.019. Contracts, Cooperative Agreements. Etc.
14.020. Promotion of Research and Development.
14.021. Grants. Gifts, Etc.
14.022. Disposition of License and Permit Fees.
14.023. Oaths of Witnesses ; Subpoenas.
[Sections 14.024 to 14.040 reserved for expansion]
Subchapter C. Licenses and Permits
14.041. License and Permit Required.
14.042. Exemptions.
14.043. Issuance of License.
14.044. License Fee.
14.043. Expiration Date.
14.046. Renewal License.
[Sections 14.047 to 14.060 reserved for expansion]
14.061. Issuance of Permit.
14.062. Permit Fee.
14.063. Scope of Permit.
14.064. Application and Notice of Intention.
14.065. Content of Notice.
14.066. Publication of Notice.
14.067. Proof of Publication : Affidavit.
14.068. Proof of Financial Responsibility.
14.069. Modification of Permit.
14.070. Scope of Activity.
14.071. Records and Reports.
[Sections 14.072 to 14.090 reserved for expansion]
Subchapter D. Sanctions
1091. Suspension ; Revocation ; Refusal to Renew.
1092. Hearing Required.
1093. Record of Hearing.
[Sections 14.094 to 14.100 reserved for expansion]
1101. Immunity of State.
1102. Private Legal Relationships.
[Sections 14.103 to 14.110 reserved for expansion]
1111. Penalty
1112. Enforcement by Board.
Subchapter A. General Provisions
Section U.001. Short Title
This chapter may be cited as the Weather Modification Act.
| Uf.002. Definitions
As used in this chapter, unless the context requires a different definition :
(1) "board" means the Texas Water Development Board ;
(2) "weather modification and control" means changing or controlling,
or attempting to change or control, by artificial methods, the natural devel-
opment of atmospheric cloud forms or precipitation forms which occur in
the troposphere ;
(3) "operation" means the performance of weather modification and
.control activities entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempting
608
to produce, a certain modifying effect within one geographical area over one
continuing time interval not exceeding four years : and
(4) "research and development" means theoretical analysis, exploration,
experimentation, and the extension of investigative findings and theories
of a scientific or technical nature into practical application for experimental
and demonstration purposes, including the experimental production and
testing of models, devices, equipment, materials, and processes.
Amended by Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 1394, ch. 538, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1975.
1975 Amendment. In subd. (3), substituted "four years" for "one year".
Subchapter B. Powers and Duties of Board
§ H.QH. Regulations — In General
The board may make regulations necessary to the exercise of its powers and the
performance of its duties under this chapter.
§ 14-012. Regulations — Licenses and Permits
In order to effectuate the purposes of this chapter, the board may make regu-
lations establishing procedures and conditions for the issuance of licenses and
permits.
§ 14.013. Regulations— Safety
The board may, by regulation or order, establish any standards and instruc-
tions to govern the carrying out of research or projects in weather modification
and control that the board considers necessary or desirable to minimize danger
to health or property.
§ 14-014- Studies; Investigations; Hearings
The board may make any studies or investigations, obtain any information,
and hold any hearings the board considers necessary or proper to assist it in
exercising its power or administering or enforcing this chapter or any regulations
or orders issued under this chapter.
§ 14-015. Advisory Committees
The board may establish advisory committees to advise the board and to make
recommendations to the board concerning legislation, policies, administration,
research, and other matters.
§ I4.OI6. Personnel
The board may, as provided by the general appropriations act, point and fix
the compensation of any personnel, including specialists and consultants, neces-
sary to perform its duties and functions under this chapter.
§ 14.017. Materials and Equipment
The board may acquire, in the manner provided by law, any materials, equip-
ment, and facilities necessary to perform its duties and functions under this
chapter.
§ 1^.018. Interstate Compacts
The board may represent the state in matters pertaining to plan procedure*,
or negotiations for interstate compacts relating to weather modification and
control.
§ 14-019. Contracts, Cooperative Agreements, Etc.
(a) The board may cooperate with public or private agencies to promote the
purposes of this chapter.
(b) The board may enter into cooperative agreements with the United States
or any of its agencies, or with counties and cities of tbis state, or with any pri-
vate or public agencies, for conducting weather modification or cloud-seeding
operations.
(c) The board may represent the state, counties, cities, and public and private
agencies in contracting with private concerns for the performance of weather
modification or cloud-seeding operations.
§ Vh020. Promotion of Research and Development
(a) In order to assist in expanding the theoretical and practcial knowledge
01' weal her modification and control, the board shall provide continuous research
and development in :
609
(1) the theory and development of methods of weather modification and
control, including processes, materials, and devices related to these methods ;
(2) the utilization of weather modification and control for agricultural,
industrial, commercial, and other purposes ; and
(3) the protection of life and property during research and operational
activities.
(b) The board may conduct and may contract for research and development
activities relating to the purposes of this section.
§ 11021. Grants, Gifts, Etc.
Subject to any limitations imposed by law, the board may accept federal
grants, private gifts, and donations from any other source. Unless the use of the
money is restricted or subject to any limitations provided by law, the board
may spend it for the administration of this chapter or may, by grant, contract,
or cooperative arrangement, use the money to encourage research and develop-
ment by a public or private agency.
§ 14.022. Disposition of License and Permit Fees
The board shall deposit all license and permit fees in the state treasury.
§ l.'f.023. Oaths of Witnesses; Subpoenas
(a) In conducting any hearing, the board or a representative designated by
it may administer oaths and examine witnesses.
(b) The board or a representative designated by it may issue subpoenas to
compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of books, records, docu-
ments, and instruments.
Subchapter C. Licenses and Permits
§ lJf.0 'tl. License and Permit Required
Except as provided by regulation of the board under Section 14.042 of this
code, no person may engage in activities for weather modification and control :
(1) without a weather modification license and a weather modification permit
issued by the board ; or
(2) in violation of any term or condition of the license or the permit.
§ 14.042. Exemptions
The board, to the extent it considers exemptions practical, shall provide by
regulation for exempting the following activities from the license and permit
requirements of this chapter :
(1) research, development, and experiments conducted by state and
federal agencies, institutions of higher learning, and bona fide nonprofit
research organizations ;
(2) laboratory research and experiments ;
(3) activities of an emergent nature for protection against fire, frost,
isleet ,or fog ; and
(4) activities normally conducted for purposes other than inducing, in-
creasing, decreasing, or preventing precipitation or hail.
§ 14.04s. Issuance of License
(a) The board, in accordance with its regulations, shall issue a weather modi-
fication license to each applicant who :
(1) pays the license fee ; and
(2) demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the board, competence in the field
of meteorology which is reasonably necessary to engage in weather modifi-
cation and control activities.
(b) If the applicant is an organization, the competence must be demonstrated
by the individual or individuals who are to be in control and in charge of the
operation for the applicant.
§ 14.044. License Fee
The fee for an original or renewal license is $50.
§ 14.045. Expiration Date
Each original or renewal license expires at the end of the state fiscal year for
which it was issued.
610
§ llf.0^6. Renewal License
At the expiration of the license period, the board shall issue a renewal license
to each applicant who pays the license fee and who was the qualifications neces-
sary for issuance of an original license.
§ lJf.OGl. Issuance of Permit
(a) The board, in accordance with its regulations, and upon a finding that the
weather modification and control operation as proposd in the permit application
will not significantly dissipate the clouds and j>revent their natural course of de-
veloping rain in the area where the operation is to be conducted to the material
detriment of persons or property in that area, may issue a weather modification
permit to each applicant who :
(1) holds a valid weather modification license ;
(2) pays the permit fee ;
(3) publishes a notice of intention and submits proof of publication as re-
quired by this chapter ; and
(4) furnishes proof of financial responsibility.
(b) The Board shall, if requested by at least 25 persons, hold at least one public
hearing in the area where the operation is to be conducted prior to the issuance
of a permit.
Amended by Acts 1975, 64th Leg., p. 13,94, ch. 538, § 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1975.
1975 Amendment. Substituted, in present subsec. (a), "and upon finding that the
weather * * * persons or property in that area, may" for "shall" and added subsec. (b).
§ Vh062. Permit Fee
The fee for each permit is $25.
§ 1^.063. Scope of Permit
A separate permit is required for each operation. If an operation is to be con-
ducted under contract, a permit is required for each separate contract. The board
shall not issue a permit for a contracted operation unless it covers a continuous
period not to exceed four years.
Amended by Acts 1975, 64th Leg., P. 1395, ch. 538. § 3, eff. Sept. 1, 1975.
1975 Amendment. Substituted "four years" for "one year".
§ 14.O64. Application and Notice of Intention
Before undertaken any operation, a licensee shall file an application for a per-
mit and shall have a notice of intention published as required by this chapter.
§ 1^.065. Content of Notice
In the notice of intention the applicant shall include :
(1) the name and address of the licensee ;
(2) the nature and object of the intended operation and the person or
organization on whose behalf it is to be conducted ;
(3) the area in which and the approximate time during which the opera-
tion is to be conducted ;
(4) the area which is intended to be affected by the operation ; and
(5) the materials and methods to be used in conducting the operation.
§ 14.066. Publication of Notice
The notice of intention shall be published at least once a week for three con-
secutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation published in each county
in which the operation is to be conducted and in each county which includes any
part of the affected area. If in any county no newspaper of general circulation is
published, then publication shall be made in a newspaper having general circu-
lation in the county.
%U,.061. Proof of Publication; Affidavit
The applicant shall file proof of the publication, together with the publishers'
affidavits, with the board during the 15-day period immediately following the date
of the last publication.
§ 1J/.068. Proof of Financial Responsibility
Proof of financial responsibility is made by showing, to the satisfaction of the
executive director of the board, that the licensee has the ability to respond in
damages for liability which might reasonably result from the operation for which
the permit is sought.
611
§ 14-069. Modification of Permit
The board may modify the terms and conditions of a permit if :
(1) the licensee is first given notice and a reasonable opportunity for a
hearing on the need for a modification ; and
(2) it appears to the board that a modification is necessary to protect the
health or property of any person.
§ 14-070. Scope of Activity
Once a permit is issued, the licensee shall confine his activities substantially
within the limits of time and area specified in the notice of intention, except to the
extent that the limits are modified by the board. He shall also comply with any
terms and conditions of the permit as originally issued or as subsequently modi-
fied by the board.
§ 14-071. Records and Reports
(a) A licensee shall keep a record of each operation conducted under permit,
showing :
(1) the method employed ;
(2) the type of equipment used ;
(3) the kind and amount of each material used ;
(4) the times and places the equipment is operated ;
(5) the name and post-office address of each individual, other than the
licensee, who participates or assists in the operation ; and
(6) other information required by the board.
(b) The board shall require written reports covering each operation, whether
it is exempt or conducted under a permit.
(c) At the time and in the manner required by the board, a licensee shall sub-
mit a written report containing the information described in subsection (a) of
this section.
(d) All information on an operation shall be submitted to the board before it is
released to the public.
(e) The reports and records in the custody of the board shall be kept open for
public inspection.
Subchapter D. Sanctions
§ 14-091. Suspension; Revocation; Refusal to Renew
(a) The board may suspend or revoke a license or permit if it appears that the
licensee :
(1) no longer has the qualifications necessary for the issuance of an origi-
nal license or permit ; or
(2) has violated any provision of this chapter.
(b) The board may refuse to renew the license of, or to issue another permit
to, any applicant who has failed to comply with any provision of this chapter.
§ 14-092. Hearing Required
The board may not suspend or revoke a license or permit without first giving
the licensee notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard with respect to the
grounds for the board's proposed action.
§ 14.093. Record of Hearing
The board shall have a record made of all proceedings at each hearing held un-
der Section 14.092 of this code, and shall have the record filed with its findings
and conclusions.
§ 14.101. Immunity of State
The state and its officers and employees are immune from liability for all
weather modification and control activities conducted by private persons and
groups.
§ 14.102. Private Legal Relationships
(a) This chapter does not affect private legal relationships, except that an
operation conducted under the license and permit requirements of this chapter
is not an ultrahazardous activity which makes the participants subject to lia-
bility without fault.
(b) The fact that a person holds a license or permit under this chapter, or that
he has complied with this chapter or the regulations issued under this chapter, is
not admissible as evidence in any legal proceeding brought against him.
612
§ U.111. Penalty
(a) A.person who violates any provision of this chapter or any valid regulation
or order issued under this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon convic-
tion is punishable by a line of not less than $100 nor more than $1,000, or by con-
finement in the county jail for not more than 10 days, or by both.
(b) A separate offense is committed each day a violation continues.
§ 14.112. Enforcement oy Board
(a) Whenever it appears that, a person has violated or is violating, or is
threatening to violate, any provision of this chapter or any regulation, license,
permit, or order of the board, then the board, or the executive director when au-
thorized by the board, may have a civil suit instituted in a district court for in-
junctive relief to restrain the person from continuing the violation or threat of
violation, or for the assessment and recovery of a civil penalty of not less than $50
nor more than $1,000 for each act of violation and for each day of violation, or
for both injunctive relief and civil penalty.
(b) Upon application for injunctive relief and a finding that a person is vio-
lating or threatening to violate any provision of this chapter or any regulation,
license, permit, or order of the board, the district court shall grant the injunctive
relief the facts may warrant.
(c) At the request of the board, or the executive director when authorized by
the board, the attorney general shall institute and conduct a suit in the name
of the State of Texas for injunctive relief or to recover the civil penalty or for
both injunctive relief and penalty, as authorized in Subsection (a) of this section.
Added by Acts 1971, 62nd Leg., p. 1769, ch. 51S, § 11, eff. May 31, 1971.
Utah
Utah Code Ann. §§ 73-15-3-73-15-8
Chapter 15 — Modification of Weather
Sec.
73—15-3. Cloud seeding to increase precipitation — Control of division of water rosources —
Powers and authority of division — "Cloud seeding" and •"cloud-seeding proj-
ect" defined.
73-15—4. Water from cloud seeding same as natural precipitation — Notice of intent prior
to cloud-seeding project.
73-15-5. Transfer of records and data to division — Establishment of reporting and record
keeping procedures.
73-1 5-6. Cloud-seeding contractors — Registration.
73-15-7. Precipitation caused by authorized project not presumed to constitute trespass
or nuisance.
73-15-8. Cloud seeding in Utah to target area in adjoining state.
73-15-1, 73-15-2. Repealed.
Repeal:; Sections 73-15-1 and 73-15-2 (L». 1953. ch. 129, §§1, 2), relating to
reports to the department of meterology, state school of mines, of weather modifi-
cation activities, were repealed by Laws 1973, ch. 193, § 7. For present provisions,
see 73-15-3 et seq.
73-15-3. Cloud seeding to increase precipitation — Control of division of icatcr
fesdiirccs — Powers and authority of division — "Cloud needing" and "cloud-seeding
project" defined. — The state of Utah through the division of water resources shall
be the only entity, private or public, that shall have authority to authorize, spon-
sor, and/or develop cloud-seeding research, evaluation, or implementation proj-
ects to alter precipitation, cloud forms, or meteorological parameters within the
state of Utah, except cloud seeding for the suppression of fog is excluded. The
division of water resources shall authorize, sponsor, and/or develop local or state-
wide cloud-seeding projects that conform to over-all state water planning objec-
tives and are determined to be feasible by the division of water resources. The
division of water resources may contract with the Utah water research labora-
tory or any other individual or organization for consultation and/or assistance in
developing cloud-seeding projects or in furthering neces-arv research of cloud
seeding or other factors that may be affected by cloud-seeding activities. Cloud
seedinjg as used in this act shall be construed to mean all acts undertaken to arti-
ficially distribute or create nuclei in cloud masses for the purposes of altering
precipitation, cloud forms, or other meteorological parameters. A cloud-see;iiiig
project as used in this act shall be a planned project to evaluate meteorological
conditions, perform c loud seeding, and evaluate results.
7.J-/J-.}. Watt* from cloud seeding same as natural precipitation — Notice of
intent prior to cloud-seeding project. — All water derived as a result of cloud
613
seeding shall be considered as a part of Utah's basic water supply the same as all
natural precipitation water supplies have been heretofore, and all statutory pro-
visions that apply to water from natural precipitation shall also apply to water
derived from cloud seeding. A notice of intent shall be hied with the division of
water rights prior to the commencement of a cloud-seeding project.
History : L. 1973, ch. 193, § 2.
13-15-5. Transfer of records and data to division — Establishment of report-
ing and record keeping procedures. — All records and data collected by depart-
ment of meteorology of the state school of mines and mineral industries of the
University of Utah since the enactment of sections 73-15-1 and 73-15-2 shall be
transferred to the division of water resources, there to be a permanent record. The
division of water resources shall establish forms and/or criteria for reporting
data and record keeping and cause that a permanent record is kept of all per-
tinent data related to cloud-seeding projects, cloud-seeding research projects, or
research related to other factors that may be affected by cloud-seeding activities.
History : L. 1973, ch. 193, § 3.
73-15-6 Cloud-seeding contractors — Registration. — Any individual or orga-
nization that would like to become a cloud-seeding contractor in the state of Utah
shall register with the division of water resources. As a part of the registration
the applicant shall meet qualifications established by the division of water re-
sources and submit proof of financial responsibility in order to give reasonable
assurance of protection to the public in the event it should be established that
damages were caused to third parties as a result of negligence in carrying out a
cloud-seeding project.
History : L. 1973, ch. 103, § 4.
13-15-7 Precipitation caused by authorized project not presumed to emistitute
trespass or nuisance. — The mere dissemination of materials and substances into
the atmosphere or causing precipitation pursuant to an authorized cloud-seeding
project shall not give rise to any presumption that such use of the atmosphere or
lands constitutes trespass or involves an actionable or enjoinable public or private
nuisance.
History : L. 1973, ch. 193, § 5.
73-15-8 Cloud seeding in Utah to target area in adjoining state. — Cloud seed-
ing in Utah to target an area in an adjoining state is prohibited except upon full
compliance of the laws of the target area state the same is if the cloud-seeding
operation took place in the target area state, as well as the other provisions of
this act.
History : L. 1973, ch. 193, § 6.
Repealing Clause. Section 7 of T-nws 1973. ch. 193 provided: "Sections 73-15-1
and 73-15-2. Utah Code Annotated 1953, as enacted by chapter 129, Laws of Utah
1953, is repealed."
WASinxoTox
Wash. Rev. Code Ann. §§ 43.37.010-43.37.200; 43-27A.080(6) ; 43.27A.180(1)
Chapter 43.37 — Weather Modification Board
Sec.
43.37.010 Definitions.
43.37.020 Bonrd established — Composition, appointment, qualifications, compensation,
quorum.
43.37.030 Powers and duties.
43.37.040 Promotion of research and development activities, contracts and agreements.
43.37.050 Hearing procedure.
43.37.060 Acceptance of sifts, donations, etc. — Weather modification board revolving ac-
count established, excess fees.
43.37.070 Staff services, materials, office space — Expenses.
43.37.0S0 License and permit required.
43.37.090 Exemptions.
43.37.100 Licenses — Requirements, duration, renewal, fees.
42.37.110 Permits — Requirements — Hearings as to issuance.
43.37.120 Separate permit for each operation — Filing and publishing notice of intention —
Activities restricted by permit and notice.
43.37.1 30 Notice of intention — Contents.
43.37.140 Publication.
42 .37.1 FiO Financial responsibility.
43.37.160 Fees — Sanctions for failure to pay.
43.37.170 Records and renorts — Open to public examination.
42.37.1S0 Revocation, suspension, modification of license or permit.
43.37.100 Liability of state denied — Legal rights of private person not affected.
43.37.200 Penalty.
43.37.010 Definitions
As used in this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise :
(1) "Department" means the department of ecology ;
614
(2) "Operation" means the performance of weather modification and control
activities pursuant to a single contract entered into for the purpose of producing
or attempting to produce, a certain modifying effect within one geographical area
over one continuing time interval not exceeding one year ; or, in case the per-
formance of weather modification and control activities is to be undertaken in-
dividually or jointly by a person or persons to be benefited and not undertaken
pursuant to a contract, "operation" means the performance of weather modifi-
cation and control activities entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempt-
ing to produce, a certain modifying effect within one geographical area over one
continuing time interval not exceeding one year ;
(3) "Research and development'' means theoretical analysis exploration and
experimentation, and the extension of investigative findings and theories of a
scientific or technical nature into practical application for experimental and
demonstration purposes, including the experimental production and testing of
models, devices, equipment, materials, and processes ;
(4) "Weather modification and control" means changing or controlling, or at-
tempting to change or control, by artificial methods, the natural development of
any or all atmospheric cloud forms or precipitation forms which occur in the
troposphere. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch. 64 § 1, effective July 1. 1973.]
4S.37.020 Board established — Composition, appointment, aualifteations, eompen-
sation, quorum
(1) There is established a weather modification board to consist of the director
of conservation, who shall be the chairman and wiio shall exercise no vote except
in case of a tie vote, nine members all appointed by the governor, including a
member of the faculty of Washington State University, a member of the faculty
of the University of Washington, one member to be a person experienced in. and
actually engaged in the commercial production of horticultural products, three
members to be persons experienced in, and actually engaged in the commercial
production of other agricultural products, and three members representing the
general public. Members appointed to represent horticulture, other agricultural
products, and the general public, shall each represent a different congressional
district in order that each congressional district of the state shall be represented
by one such appointee. The term of office of each member of the board appointed
prior to March 3. 1961 shall be four years, except that the first terms of office of
such appointed members first taking office shall expire, as determined by the gov-
ernor at the time of their appointment, one each at the end of the first, second,
third and fourth years after March 3, 1957. The term of office of each member
appointed to the board as an additional member because of this amendatory act
[1061 c 1954 § 1] shall be four years, except that the first terms of office of such
appointed members first taking office shall expire, as determined by the governor
at the time of their appointment, two at the end of the first year after March 3.
1961, and one each at the end of the second, third, and fourth years after March 3.
1961. Any member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring prior to the expiration
of the term for which his predecessor was appointed shall be appointed for the
remainder of such term.
(2) Members of the board shall receive no compensation for the performance
of their duties under the provisions of this chapter; but each member shall be
reimbursed, to the extent allowed by law from funds available for the adminis-
tration of this chapter, for expenses necessarily incurred in the performance of
his duties.
(3) A majority of the members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction
of business.
17.030 rowers and duties
In the performance of its functions the department may, in addition to any
other acts authorized by law:
(D Establish advisory committees to advise with and make recommendations
to the department concerning legislation, policies, administration, research, and
other matters ;
(2) Establish by regulation or order such standards and instructions to govern
the carrying out of research or projects in weather modification and control is
the department may deem necessary or desirable to minimize danger to health
or property: and make such rules and regulations as are necessary in the per-
formance of its powers and duties;
615
(3) Make such studies, investigations, obtaiu such information, and hold such
hearings as the department may deem necessary or proper to assist it in exercis-
ing its authority or in the administration or enforcement of this chapter or any
regulations or orders issued, thereunder ;
(4) Appoint and fix the compensation of such personnel, including specialists
and consultants, as are necessary to perform its duties and functions :
(5) -Acquire, in the manner provided by law, such materials, equipment, and
facilities as are necessary to perforin its duties and functions ;
(6 ) Cooperate with public or private agencies in the performance of the depart-
ment's functions or duties and in furtherance of the purposes of this chapter ;
(7) Represent the state in any and all matters pertaining to plans, procedures,
or negotiations for interstate compacts relating to weather modification and con-
trol. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch 64 § 2, effective July 1, 1973.]
Ij.^.M.OIfO Promotion of research mnd development activities — Contracts and
agreements
The department shall exercise its powers in such manner as to promote the
continued conduct of research and development activities in the fields specified
below by private or public institutions or persons and to assist in the acquisition
of an expanding fund of theoretical and practical knowledge in such fields. To
this end the department may conduct, and make arrangements, including con-
tracts and agreements, for the conduct of. research and development activities
relating to :
(1) The theory and development of methods of weather modification and con-
trol, including processes, materials, and devices related thereto;
i - i Utilization of weather modification and control for agricultural, indus-
trial, commercial, and other purposes;
(3) The protection of life and property during research and operational activi-
ties. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch § 3, effective July 1, 1973.]
Ji3.o7.0o0 — Hearing procedure
In the case of hearings pursuant to RCW 43.37.1S0 the department shall, and
in other cases may, cause a record of the proceedings to be taken and filed with
the department, together with its findings and conclusions. For any hearing, the
director of the department or a representative designated by him is authorized
to administer oaths and affirmations, examine witnesses, and issue, in the name
of the department, notice of the hearing or subpoenas requiring any person to
appear and testify, or to appear and produce documents, or both, at any desig-
nated place. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch G4 § 4, effective July 1, 1973.]
43.37.060 Acceptance of gifts, donations, etc.
(1) The department may, subject to any limitations otherwise imposed by
law. receive and accept for and in the name of the state any funds which may
be offered or become available from federal grants or appropriations, private
gifts, donations, or bequests, or any other source, and may expend such funds,
subject to any limitations otherwise provided by law, for the encouragement
of research and development by a state, public, or private agency, either by direct
grant, by contract or other cooperative means.
(2) All license and permit fees paid to the department shall be deposited in the
state general fund. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch 64 § 5, effective July 1, 1973.]
43.37.070 Staff services, materials, office space — Expenses
Repealed by Laws 1973 ch 64 § 19, effective July 1, 1973.
43.37.080 License and permit required
Except as provided in RCW 43.37.090, no person shall engage in activities for
weather modification and control except under and in accordance with a license
and a permit issued by the department authorizing such activities. [Amended by
Laws 1973 ch 64 § 6, effective July 1, 1973.]
43.37.090 Exceptions
The department, to the extent it deems practical, shall provide by regulation
for exempting from license, permit, and liability requirements. (1) research and
development and experiments by state and federal agencies, institutions of higher
learning, and bona fide nonprofit research organizations; (2) laboratory re-
search and experiments: (3) activities of an emergent character for protection
against fire, frost, sleet, or fog; and (4) activities normally engaged in for pur-
616
poses other than those of inducing, increasing, decreasing, or preventing precipi-
tation or hall. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch § 7, effective July 1, 1973.]
43.37.100 Licenses — Requirements, duration, renewal, fees
(1) Licenses to engage in activities for weather modification and control
shall be issued to applicants therefor who pay the license fee required and who
demonstrate competence in the field of meteorology to the satisfaction of the
department, reasonably necessary to engage in activities for weather modifica-
tion and control. If the applicant is an organization, these requirements must
be met by the individual or individuals who will be in control and in charge of
the operation for the applicant.
(2) The department shall issue licenses in accordance with such procedures
and subject to such conditions as it may by regulation establish to effectuate the
provisions of this chapter. Each license shall be issued for a period to expire
at the end of the calendar year in which it is issued and. if the licensee possesses
the qualifications necessary for the issuance of a new license, shall upon applica-
tion be renewed at the expiration of such period. A license shall be issued- or
renewed only upon the payment to the department of one hundred dollars for the
license or renewal thereof. [Amended of Laws 1973 ch 64 § 8, effective July
1, 1973.]
43.37.110 Permits — Requirement? — Hearings as to issuance
The department shall issue permits in accordance with such procedures and
subject to such conditions as it may by regulation establish to effectuate the
provisions of this chapter only :
(1) If the applicant is licensed pursuant to this chapter ;
(2) If a sufficient notice of intention is published and proof of publication is
filed as required by RCW 43.37.140 ;
(3) If the applicant furnishes proof of financial responsibility, as provided
in RCW 43.37.150, in an amount to be determined by the department but not to-
exceed twenty thousand dollars ;
(4) If the fee for a permit is paid as required by RCW 43.37.160;
(5) If the weather modification and control activities to be conducted under
authority of the permit are determined by the department to be for the general
welfare and public good ;
(6) If the department has held an open public hearing in Olympia as to such
issuance. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch 64 § 9, effective July 1, 1973.]
43.37.120 Separate permit for each operation — Filing and publishing notice of
intention — Activities restricted by permit and notice
A separate permit shall be issued for each operation. Prior to undertaking
any weather modification and control activities the licensee shall file with the
department and also cause to be published a notice of intention. The licensee,
if a permit is issued, shall confine his activities for the permitted operation
within the time and area limits set forth in the notice of intention, unless modi-
fied by the department ; and his activities shall also conform to any conditions
imposed by the department upon the issuance of the permit or to the terms of
the permit as modified after issuance. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch 64 § 10, effec-
tive July 1, 1973.]
43.37.130 Notice of intention — Contents
The notice of intention shall set forth at least all the following :
(1) The name and address of the licensee ;
(2) The nature and object of the intended operation and the person or orga-
nization on whose behalf it is to be conducted ;
(3) The area in which and the approximate time during which the operation
will be conducted ;
(4) The area which is intended to be affected by the operation ;
(5) The materials and methods to be used in conducting the operation.
43.37.140 Notice of intention — Publicat ion
(1) The applicant shall cause the notice of intention, or that portion there-
of including the items specified in RCW 43.37.130, to be published at least once
a week for three consecutive weeks in a legal newspaper having a general cir-
culation and published within any county in which the operation is to be c<>n-
ducted and in which the affected area is located, or, if the operation is to be con-
ducted in more than one county or if the affected area is located in more than one
county or is located in a county other than the one in which the operation is to-
617
be conducted, then in a legal newspaper having a general circulation and pub-
lished within each of such counties. In case there is no legal newspaper published
within the appropriate county, publication shall be made in a legal newspaper
having a general circulation within the county.
(2) Proof of publication, made in the manner provided by law, shall be filed
by the licensee with the department within fifteen days from the date of the last
publication of the notice. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch G4 § 11, effective July 1,
1973.]
43.37.150 Fina?icial responsibility
Proof of financial responsibility may be furnished by an applicant by his show-
ing, to the satisfaction of the department, his ability to respond in damages for
liability which might reasonably be attached to or result from his weather modi-
fication and control activities in connection with the rperation for which he seeks
a permit. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch 64 § 12, effective July 1, 1973.1
J{3.31.160 Fees — Sanctions for failure to pay
The fee to be paid by each applicant for a permit shall be equivalent to one
and one-half percent of the estimated cost of such operation, the estimated cost
to lie computed by the department from the evidence available to it. The fee is
due and payable to the department as of the date of the issuance of the permit;
however, if the applicant is able to give to the department satisfactory security
lor the payment of the balance, he may be permitted to commence the operation,
and a permit may be issued therefor, upon the payment of not less than fifty per-
cent of the fee. The balance due shall be paid within three months from the date
of the termination of the operation as prescribed in the permit. Failure to pay a
permit fee as required shall be grounds for suspension or revocation of the li-
cence of the delinquent permit holder and grounds for refusal to renew his li-
cense or to issue any further permits to such person. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch
04 $ 13, effective July 1. 1973.]
.'(3.31.170 Reeords and reports — Open to public examination
(1) Every licensee shall keep and maintain a record of all operations con-
ducted by him pursuant to his license and each permit, showing the method
employed, the type of equipment used, materials and amounts thereof used, the
times and places of operation of the equipment, the name and post office address
of each individual participating or assisting in the operation other than the li-
censee, and such other general information as may be required by the department
and shall report the same to the department at the time and in the manner
required.
( 2) The department shall require written reports in such manner as it provides
but not inconsistent' with the provisions of this chapter, covering each operation
for which a permit is issued. Further, the department shall require written re-
ports from such organizations as are exempted from license, permit, and liability
requirements as provided in RCW 43.37.090.
( 3 ) The reports and records in the custody of the department shall be open for
public examination. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch 64 § 14, effective July 1, 1973.1
43.37.180 Revocation, suspension, modification of license or permit
(1) The department may suspend or revoke any license or permit issued if
it appears that the licensee no longer possesses the qualifications necessary for
the issuance of a new license or permit. The department may suspend or revoke
any license or permit if it appears that the licensee has violated any of the pro-
visions of this chapter. Such suspension or revocation shall occur only after
notice to the licensee and a reasonable opportunity granted such licensee to be
heard respecting the grounds of the proposed suspension or revocation. The de-
partment may refuse to renew the license of, or to issue another permit to, any
applicant who has failed to comply with any provision of this chapter.
(2) The department may modify the terms of a permit after issuance there-
of if the licensee is first given notice and a reasonable opportunity for a hearing
respecting the grounds for the proposed modification and if it appears to the
department that it is necessary for the protection of the health or the property of
any person to make the modification proposed. [Amended by Laws 1973 ch 64 § 15,
effective July 1, 1973.1
43.37.190 Liability of state denied — Legal rights of private persons not affected
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to impose or accept any liability
or responsibility on the part of the state, the department, or any state officials
613
or employees for any weather modification and control activities of any private
person or group, nor to affect in any way any contractual, tortious, or other legal
rights, duties, or liahilities between any private persons or groups. [Amended by
Laws 1973 ch 64 § 16, effective July 1, 1973.1
.',3.37.900 Revolving account abolished
The weather modification board revolving account is hereby abolished. Any
funds remaining in such account shall be transferred to the general fund. [Added
by Laws 1973 ch 64 § 17, effective July 1, 1973.1
.',3.37.200 Penal in
Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter or any lawful reg-
ulation or order issued pursuant thereto, shall lie guilty of a misdemeanor : and
a continuing violation is punishable as a separate offense for each day during
which it occurs.
'/3.27A.080 Powers, duties, functions of certain state agencies transferred to
department — Columbia basin division
The department shall exercise the powers, duties and functions, through divi-
sions as provided for in RCW 43.27A.070 of the following state agencies or divi-
sion of state agencies, and public officials, and all their powers, duties and
functions are transferred to the department ofsvater resources :
(1) The division of reclamation of the department of conservation;
(2) The division of water resources of the department of conservation ;
(3) The division of flood control of the department of conservation ;
(4) The division of power resources of the department of conservation ;
(5) The Columbia basin commission ;
(6) The weather modification board ;
All other powers, duties or functions now vested in the department of con-
servation or the director thereof are transferred to the department of water re-
sources, except those powers which are expressly transferred to some other agency
of the state by this chapter. The director in exercising the powers, duties and
functions of the Columbia basin commission as set forfli in chapter 43.49 RCW
may create and maintain in the department a Columbia basin division.
'/3.27A.180 Agencies abolished
On July 1, 1967, the following state agencies are abolished :
(1) Weather modification board.
(2) Columbia basin commission.
(3) Power advisory committee.
(4) Department of conservation.
West Virginia
W. Va. Code §§ 29-2B-1— 29-2B-15
Article 2B — Weather Modification
Sec.
29-2B-1. Declaration of policy.
29-2B-2. Definitions.
29-2B-3. Administration by director and commission.
29-2B-4. When license and registration of equipment required.
L.'!)-2B-r>. Application for license.
29-2B-6. Registration of equipment.
29-2B-7. Publication of notice of intention to undertake operation.
29 2B- 8. Permission to undertake emergency project without compliance with § 29-2B -7
29-2B-9. Records and reports.
29-2B-10. Research projects ; safetv.
29-2B-11. Enforcement of article.
29-2B-12. Suspension or revocation of license.
29 2B— 13. Compensation for damage.
29-2B-14. Acts not authorized.
29-2B-15. Offenses and penalties.
§ 29-2B-1. Declaration of policy
The public interest, health, safety, welfare and necessity require that scientific
experimentation in the field of artificial nucleation, and that scientific efforts
to develop and increase natural precipitation of rain, snow, moisture, or water in
any form contained in the atmosphere, within the State, be encouraged in order
to develop, conserve, and protect the natural water resources of the State and to
safeguard life and property. (1969, c. 18.)
619
§ 29-2B-2. Definitions
As used in this article :
(a) "Director" means the director of aeronautics.
(b) "Commission" means the West Virginia aeronautics commission.
(c) "Operation" means the performance of weather modification and control
activities pursuant to a single contract entered into for the purpose of producing,
or attempting to produce, a certain modifying effect within one geographical area
over one continuing time interval not exceeding one year, or, if the performance
of weather modification and control activities is to be undertaken individually or
jointly by a person or persons to be benefited and not undertaken pursuant to a
contract, "operation" means the performance of weather modification and control
activities entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempting to produce, a
certain modifying effect within one geographical area over one continuing time
interval not exceeding one year.
(d) "Person" means any individual, firm, association, organization, partner-
ship, company, corporation, private or public, political subdivision, or other public
agency.
(e) "Research and development" means theoretical analysis, exploration and
experimentation and the extension of investigative findings and theories of a
scientific or technical nature into practical application for experimental and dem-
onstration purposes, including the experimental production and testing of models,
devices, equipment, materials and processes.
(f) "Weather modification and control" means changing or controlling, or at-
tempting to change or control, by artificial methods the natural development of
any or all atmospheric cloud forms and precipitation forms which occur in the
troposphere. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-3. Administration by director and commission
The director shall administer this article under the supervision of the commis-
sion. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-4. When license and registration of equipment required
(a) Xo person, without first securing a license from the commission, shall
cause or attempt to cause condensation or precipitation of rain, snow, moisture, or
water in any form contained in the atmosphere.
(b) Xo person without registering with the commission shall have in his pos-
session any cloud seeding equipment unless he is an employee of or under contract
with a person conducting a weather modification and control operation who has
been granted a license by the commission. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-5. Application for license; renewal; temporary suspension
(a) Any person desiring to do any of the acts specified in section four [§ 29-
2B— 1] of this article may file with the director an application in writing for a
license. Each application shall be accompanied by a filing fee fixed by the com-
mission but not to exceed one hundred dollars, and shall be on a form to be sup-
plied for such purpose by the director.
(b) Every application shall set forth all of the following :
(1) The name and post-office address of the applicant.
(2) The previous education, experience and qualifications of the applicant
or, if the applicant is other than an individual, the previous education, ex-
perience and qualifications of the persons who will be in control of and
charged with the operations of the applicant. Previous experience includes
subcontracting or counseling services.
(3) A general description of the operations which the applicant intends to
conduct and the method and type of equipment, including all nucleating
agents, that the applicant proposes to use. Aircraft must be listed by numbers
and pilots' names.
(4) A statement listing all employees who are residents of West Virginia
or who will be directly employed in the intended operation, or both.
(5) A bond or insurance covering any damage the licensee may cause
through his operations in an amount of fifteen thousand dollars or other evi-
dence of financial responsibility shall be furnished and executed at the time
of the grant of the license : Provided, that no bond shall be required of any
person who shall cause or attempt to cause condensation or precipitation of
rain, snow, moisture or water in any form contained in the atmosphere over
any landing strip or runway of any airport or any approach thereto in an
effort to improve the visibility above the landing strip, runway or approach.
(6) Every applicant shall have a resident agent within this State.
620
(e) Upon the filing of the application upon a form supplied by the director and
•containing the information prescribed by this article and accompanied by the
required filing fee and bond or insurance, the director may issue a license to the
applicant entitling the applicant to conduct the operations described in the ap-
plication for the calendar year for which the license is issued, unless the license
is sooner revoked, suspended or modified.
(d) A license may be renewed annually upon application to the director, ac-
companied by a renewal fee fixed by the commission but not to exceed one hun-
dred dollars, on or before the last day of January of the calendar year for which
the license is renewed.
(e) Any license granted under this section shall be subject to temporary sus-
pension by the director. Such suspension may occur whenever the director is noti-
fied by the office of emergency services that, within an area defined by the office
of eniergency services, precipitation or other effects of weather modification op-
erations would be likely to cause or aggravate a potential or ongoing disaster
Any such suspension shall continue until the director is notified by the office of
emergency services that the disaster or threat of disaster has passed. Should any
license be suspended under this subsection, the prohibitions of section four [§ 29-
2B-,4] and penalties of section fifteen [§29-2B-15] of this article shall become
I ive immediately. (19G9, c. 18 ; 1973, c. 50.)
§ 29-2 Ji-G. Registration of equipment
Every person not desiring a license who owns or possesses cloud seeding equip-
ment, shall promptly register the same with the director on a form furnished by
him. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-7. Publication of notice of intention to undertake operation.
(a) Prior to undertaking any operation authorized by the license, the licensee
shall file with the director and cause to be published a notice of intention. The
licensee shall then confine his activities for that operation substantially within
the time and area limits set forth in the notice of intention.
(b) The notice of intention shall set forth all of the following:
(1) The name and address of the licensee.
(2) The nature and object of the intended operation and the person or
persons on whose behalf it is to be conducted.
(3) The area in which and the approximate time during which the opera-
tion will be conducted.
(4) The area which will be affected by the operation as near as the same
may be determined in advance.
(e) The notice of intention required by this section shall be published as a
Class III legal advertisement and the publication area shall be the county where-
in the operation is to be conducted and in which the affected area is located, or,
if (lie operation is to be conducted in more than one county or if the affected area
is located in more than one county or is located in a county other than the one in
which the operation is to be conducted, then such notice shall be published in like
manner in a newspaper having a general circulation within each of such counties.
td) Proof of publication shall be filed by the licensee with the director within
fifteen days from the date of the last publication of the notice. Proof of publica-
tion shall be by copy of the notice as published, attached to and made a part of
the affidavit of the publisher or foreman of the newspaper publishing the notice.
H9G9. c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-8. Permission to undertake emergency project without compliance irifh
§ 29-2B-7.
fa) Notwithstanding any provision of this article to the contrary, the director
may grant a licensee permission to undertake an emergency niicleation project,
without prior compliance by the licensee with the provisions of section seven
[§29-2P>-71. subsection (a), if the same appears to the commissioner to be neces-
sary or desirable in aid of extinguishment of fires.
( b) Notwithstanding any provision of this article to the contrary, upon request
of the county commissioners of a county or of the governing body of a city, bor-
ough, town or township, and upon the submission of such supporting evidence as
I he commission may require, the commission may grant a licensee permission to
undertake a nucleation project for the purpose of alleviating a drought emer-
gency, without prior compliance by the licensee with the provisions of section
seven [§29-2P>-7], subsection (a), requiring publication of notice of intention,
if such project appears to the department to be necessary or desirable.
(c) Nothing contained in Ibis sect ion shall he construed as to relieve the licensee
in the cases set forth in subsection (a) or (b) of this section from compliance
621
with the provisions of section seven [§ 29-2B-7], requiring publication of notice
of intention and filing of proof of such publication, as soon after the granting of
permission by the director as is practicable. In lieu thereof the licensee may fur-
nish equivalent transmission of notice of intention by radio or television, and
proof thereof, as soon after the granting of permission by the director as is prac-
ticable. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-9. Records and reports
(a) Every licensee shall keep and maintain a record of all operations con-
ducted by him pursuant to his license showing the method employed, the type
of equipment used, the times and places of operation of the equipment, the name
and post-office address of each person participating or assisting in the operation
other than the licensee, and such other information as may be required by the
commission, and shall report the same to the director immediately upon the
completion of each operation.
(b) Each licensee shall further prepare and maintain an evaluation statement
for each operation which shall include a report as to estimated precipitation,
defining the gain or loss occurring from nucleation activities, together with
supporting data therefor. This statement, together with such other pertinent
information as the commission may require, shall be sent to the commission
upon completion and be available to inspection by the commission or director at
all times on the licensee's premises.
(c) The commission shall require written reports concerning each operation
conducted by a licensee under this article.
(d) All information on an operation shall be submitted to the commission
before any information on such operation may be released to the public.
(e) The reports and records in the custody of the commission shall be open for
public examination as public documents. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-10. Research projects ; safety
(a) Research work within the province of this statute shall be permitted only
when authorized by the commission.
(b) Government and armed forces projects within the province of this statute
must meet all the requirements of this article.
(c) No nucleating agent may be used in concentrations dangerous to man or
causes environmental pollution as determined by the state department of health.
(1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-11. Enforcement of article
In order to enforce the provisions of this article, the "West Virginia state police
shall, on request of the commission, assign at least one trooper and one investi-
gator to an area where unlawful cloud seeding is suspected. If such police request
the same, the commission shall assign an airplane and pilot. Air samples shall
be taken by the West Virginia air pollution control commission if requested by
the state police or the commission. For such enforcement purposes, the state
department of health shall furnish such technical services as the commission or
director may request. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-12. Suspension or revocation of license
Any license may be revoked, suspended or modified if the commission finds,
after due notice to the licensee and a hearing thereon, that the licensee has
failed or refused to comply with any of the provisions of this article. The
proceedings herein referred to shall be conducted in accordance with tbe pro-
visions of article one [§ 29A-1-1 et seq.], chapter twenty-nine- A of the Code of
West Virginia, one thousand nine hundred thirty-one, as amended, known as
the "West Virginia Administrative Procedures Act" and the commission shall
have all the powers granted therein. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-13. Compensation for damage
Any license who causes a drought as determined by the commission shall com-
pensate farmers for damages. Any licensee who by causing heavy downpours or
storms which cause damage to lands as determined by the commission shall com-
pensate farmers and property owners for such damages. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-14. Acts not authorized
(a) Nothing contained in this article shall authorize any person to carry out
a cloud seeding operation from West Virginia to seed in another state where such
cloud seeding is prohibited.
34-857—79 42
622
(b) Nothing contained in this article shall be construed to authorize the sup-
pression-of lightning. (1969, c. 18.)
§ 29-2B-15. Offenses and penalties
(a) Any airplane pilot who flies an airplane with numbers invisible to escape
identification under this article shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon
conviction thereof, have his license revoked for a period of five years.
(b) Any airport owner or operator who knowingly boards cloud seeding planes
to seed clouds or who operates as a cloud seeder without a license shall be guilty
of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, have his airport permit revoked
for one year and be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than five hundred dollars
and for a second or subsequent offense, he shall be sentenced to pay a fine of
not more than one thousand dollars.
(c) Any person knowingly having in his possession without registering the
same with the commission any cloud seeding equipment shall, on conviction
thereof, be sentenced to pay a fine of ten thousand dollars.
(d) Any person who makes any false statement to secure a license under this
article shall, on conviction thereof, have his license revoked permanently.
(e) Any person who violates any other provision of this article shall be guilty
of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than
one thousand dollars, or imprisoned in the county jail not more than one year,
or both fined and imprisoned. (1969, c. 18.)
Wisconsin
Wise. Stat. Ann. § 195.40
195. J/0 Reporting operations to artificially influence precipitation
(1) For the purpose of determining the effect of operations designed to in-
fluence precipitation of atmospheric moisture by artificial means it is hereby
required that all persons engaged in such operations shall comply with the pro-
visions of this section.
(2) Any person who enters into any contract for or engages in any activity de-
signed or intended to affect by artificial means the precipitation of atmospheric
moisture in this state shall register each proposed operation with the commission.
(3) The registration shall set forth such data as to time, place and method
of each operation as the commission shall reasonably require for the purpose of
making a scientific evaluation of each operation and its effect upon the public
welfare.
(4) Each registrant shall within 10 days report on the conduct of each opera-
tion and shall provide such data as the commission may deem necessary in the
public interest.
(5) Any person who * * * violates any of the provisions of this section shall
forfeit for each such offense a sum * * * not to exceed $250 together with the
actual costs of all administrative and legal action necessary to collect such for-
feiture. Such forfeiture shall be enforced and the proceeds disposed of as pre-
scribed in s. * * * SO. 03. Any unregistered operation shall be subject to summary
abatement as a public nuisance.
Wyoming
Wyo. Stat. 1 §§ 10-4—10-9; 9-267—9-276
§ 10-)/. Aerial spraying, etc. — Annual registration required; information to he
shown. — On the first Monday in May of each year, any person or persons, firm,
partnership, corporation, association, or any other organization engaged in the
activity or business of aerial spraying, spreading of seeds, weather-modification
or other Chemicals, dusting, fertilizing, baiting, predator control or insect control
of any area of Ibis state, and all aircraft in Wyoming used for predator control
or equipped with apparatus for distribution of sprays, dnsts, weather-modifica-
tion or other Chemicals, seeds, or bait shall be registered annually with the
Wyoming aeronautics commission on a printed form or forms prescribed by
the Wyoming aeronautics commission, showing the name of the firm to be
registered, the name and address of the owner, owners, and manager thereof,
the name and address of the person to pilot such aircraft, his airman rating,
number of hours flown, with airman certificate number, the make, model and
type of aircraft to be used and the identification number assigned to the aircraft
and type of spraying, seed or chemical spreading or dusting rig installed on the
aircraft. (Laws 1951, ch. 142, § 1 ; 1973, eh. 57, § 1.)
623
§ 10-5. Same — Unlawful unless registered. — It is unlawful for any person, firm,
partnership, corporation, association, organization or any combination thereof
to engage in the activtiy or business of spraying, spreading of seeds, weather-
moditication or other chemicals, dusting, fertilizing, baiting, predator control
or inspect control of any area of this state by means or aircraft unless they
are registered with the Wyoming aeronautics commission. (Laws 1951, ch. 142,
§2; 1973, ch. 57, § 1.)
§ 10-6. Same — Pilot, operator or applicator qualifications. — All pilots, operators,
or applicators conducting aerial spraying, spreading of seeds, weather-modifica-
tion or other chemicals, dusting, fertilizing, predator control or insect control
by aircraft must have a minimum of 500 solo hours, 75 of which are in the
same type aircraft used in making the application or control, and 25 hours
actual spraying or predator control experience. A pilot may satisfy the require-
ment for actual spraying, or predator control experience by taking five hours of
dual simulated low flying from a qualified instructor. (Laws 1951, ch. 142, §3;
1973, ch.57, § 1.)
§ 10-7. Same — Shut-off devices for aircraft required. — That each aircraft spray-
ing, seed or chemical spreading or dusting rig used for aerial application or dis-
semination of sprays, weather-modification or other chemicals and dusts shall
be satisfactorily equipped with a positive shut-off device at each discharge
nozzle (manually controlled shut-off valves, spring loaded valves or Ball checks
acceptable) which will absolutely prevent the dissemination of material on
any portion of the terrain over which flight is made other than the area being
treated or sprayed. (Laws 1951, ch. 142, § 4.)
§ 10-8. Same — Records of applications. — That each applicator must maintain
a record of each application of weather-modification or other chemicals, fer-
tilizer or insecticides which records may be inspected by officials of the aero-
nautics commission on demand. Copies of said records shall be transmitted to
the Wyoming aeronautics commission within ten days after the end of each
calendar month during period of operation in this state and prior to departure
from the State of Wyoming. The records shall contain the following minimum
information : Name and address of contractee ; property description ; variety
of crop treated ; stage of crop growth ; pests or weeds to be controlled ; brand
and type of chemical used ; type of solution or seeds used ; quantity of chemical
used per acre ; date and time sprayed or treated ; wind velocity and direction.
(Laws 1951, ch. 142, §5.)
§10-9. Same — Violation of §§ 10-4 to 10-8. — Whoever shall violate any provi-
sion of this act [§§ 10-4 to 10-9] or rules and regulations thereunder shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not less than twenty-
five ( $25.00) dollars for the first offense and not less than fifty ($50.00) dollars
for each subsequent offense, or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding-
sixty (60) days, or both. (Laws 1951, ch. 142, § 6.)
Article 12
Weather Modification Board
§ 9-267. Sovereign right to moisture in clouds declared; encouraging weather
experimentation; proper safeguards. — A. It is hereby declared that the Start'
of Wyoming claims its sovereign right to the use for its residents and best in-
terests the moisture contained in the clouds and atmosphere within its sovereign
state boundaries.
B. It is hereby declared that although little is known regarding artificial weath-
er modification, research and experimentation shall be encouraged.
C. It is hereby declared that although the ultimate use of modification methods
is speculative, the application of such methods should have proj)er safeguards
and provide sufficient data to protect life, property, and public interest. (Laws
1951, ch. 131, § 1. )
§ 9-268. Board created; designation ; composition; compensation ; expenses. —
There is hereby created a board, to be known as the state weather modification
board. The members of the board shall consist of the state engineer, the com-
missioner of agriculture, and the president of the University of Wyoming or
their designated representatives. The members shall serve on the board without
pay but shall be entitled to charge actual expenses incurred therewith to the
department by which they are primarily einnloved. (Laws 1951. eh. 131. §2.)
§ 9-269. Function of board; "weather modification" defined. — The primary func-
624
tion of ,the board is to procure, compile, and evaluate information relative to
weather modification experiments and activities within the state boundaries.
The term "weather modification" means changing, or controlling any of the
weather phenomena by chemical, mechanical, or physical methods. (Laws 1951,
ch. 131, §3.)
§ 9-270. Weather modification permit — Required to engage in modification ac-
tivities; issuance; form. — It shall be unlawful for anyone to engage in weather
modification activities except under and in accordance with a permit issued by
the state engineer. The state engineer may issue such permit only upon the rec-
ommenation of the weather modification board and in such form as prescribed
by the board. (Laws 1951, ch. 131, § 4.)
§ 9-211. Same — Separate permit required for each experiment or activity;
permits issued for one year; revocation; fees, qualifications of permittee; author-
ity to promulgate rules and regulations. — A separate permit shall be issued for
each experiment or activity. Permits shall be revocable by the state engineer upon
recommendation of the board, in accordance with such procedures as the board
shall establish. Permits are to be issued for one year from October 1 of one year
to September 30 of the following year. A fee of $25 shall be charged for each permit
issued or renewed. Fees received by the board shall be deposited with the state
treasurer to be placed into the general fund. A permit shall be issued only to a
person, or persons, who can demonstrate to the board's satisfaction that he has
or they have adequate qualifications in the atmospheric sciences. To justify is-
suance of a permit, the state weather modification board is hereby granted rea-
sonable authority to promulgate the rules and regulations necessary to effectuate
the purposes of the Wvoming weather modification laws. (Laws 1951, ch. 131,
§ 5 : 1965, ch. 66, § 1 ; 1971, ch. 104, § 1 ; 1973. ch. 245, § 3.
§ 9-212. Same — Registration certificate to be issued; fee. — Prior to the issuance
of any permit the board shall have issued a registration certificate to the person
or persons requesting such permit. A registration certificate shall be issued only
after the board has considered and approved the qualifications and responsibility
of the person or persons requesting a certificate. A registration fee of twenty-five
dollars ($25.00) per calendar year shall be charged for each registration certifi-
cate so issued. Registration fees so received by the board may be used by the
board in paying part or all of its administrative expenses. (Laws 1951, ch. 131,
§6.)
§ 9-21 '3. Same — Written report of experiments required. — The board shall be
required to demand and receive a written report, in such manner as it shall pro-
vide, covering each separate experiment or activity for which a permit is issued.
(Laws 1951. ch. 131. § 7.)
§ 9-21 Jf. Same — Failure to obtain permit. — Any person, persons, corporation,
institution, or group engaging in a weather modification experiment without a
permit shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction subject to a fine not to
exceed one-thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment in the penitentiary
for not less than one nor more than five years. (Laws 1951, ch. 131, § 10: 19.15.
ch. 166. § 1.)
§ 9-215. Authority to receive and accept funds. — Said board is hereby author-
ized and empowered to receive and accept for and in the name of the state any
and all funds which may be offered or become available, from federal grants or
appropriations, private gifts, donations or bequests, or any other source, and to
expend such funds for the expenses of administering this act [§§ 9-267 to 9-276],
and for the encouragement of experimentation in weather modification by the
"Tniversity of Wyoming or any other appropriate state or public asrency. either
by direct grant, by contract, or other co-operative means. (Laws 1951, ch. 131,
§8.)
§9-216. Act construed; rights, duties and liabilities unchanged. — Nothinsr in
this act T§§ 9-267 to 9-276] shall be construed to impose or accept any liability or
responsibilily on the part of the State, the board, or any state officials or "em-
ployees, for any weather-modification activities of any private person or group,
nor to affect in any way any contractual, tortious, or other lesral rights, duties
or liabilities between any private persons or groups. (Laws 1951, oh. 131. §9.)
Effective date.— Section 11, ch 131. Laws 1951, makes the act effective from
and after passage. Approved February 19, 1951.
Appendix E
List of State Contacts for Further Information on Weather
Modification Activities Within the States *• 2
Commissioner, Department of Agriculture and Industries, State Capitol, Mont-
gomery, Ala. 36104.
Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources, Pouch M, Juneau, Alaska 99811.
Briggs, Philip C, Chief Hydrologist Arizona Water Commission 222 N. Central,
Suite 800, Phoenix, Ariz. 85004.
Division of Soil and Water Resources, Department of Commerce, 1501 N. Uni-
versity Avenue, Suite 364, Little Rock, Ark. 72207.
Finlayson, Donald J.. Department of Water Resources, P.O. Box 16008S Sac-
ramento, Calif. 95816.
Sherman, Harris, Executive Director, Department of Natural Resources, 1313
Sherman Street, Room 718, Denver, Colo. 80203.
Commissioner Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, State Office
Building, Hartford, Conn. 06115.
Olney, Austin P., Secretary, Department of Natural Resources and Environmen-
tal Control. Edward Tatnall Building, Dover. Del. 19901.
Chief, Bureau of Water Resource Management, Montgomery Building, 2562
Executive Center Circle. East, Tallahassee, Fla. 32301.
Rhinehart, John, Office of Planning and Budget, 270 Washington St., S.W.,
Atlanta, Ga. 30334.
Governor, Executive Chambers, State Capitol, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813.
Allred, Stephen, Department of Water Resources, 373 W. Franklin Street, Boise,
Idaho 83720.
Changnon, Stanley A., Jr., Head, Atmospheric Sciences Section, Illinois State
Water Survey, Box 232, Urbana 111. 61801.
Schaal Lawrence, State Climatologist, Poultry Science Building, Purdue Uni-
versity, West Lafayette, Ind. 47907.
Waite, Paul. Iowa Weather Service, Room 10, Terminal Building, Municipal Air-
port, Des Moines, Iowa 50321.
Kostecki, Don, Kansas Water Resource Board, Suite 303, 503 Kansas, Topeka,
Kan. 66603.
Kimmel, Michael J., Office of Planning and Research, Department of Natural
Resources and Environment, Capitol Plaza Tower, 6th Floor, Frankfort, Ky.
40601.
Aguillard, Roy, Louisiana State Department of Public Works, Box 44155, Capitol
Station, Baton Rouge, La. 70804.
Anderson, Burton R., Water Resource Planner, State Planning Office, 184 State
Street, Augusta, Me. 04333.
Hance, Young D., Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Parole Plaza Office
Building, Annapolis, Md. 21401.
McLoughlin, Thomas F., Director, Division of Administrative Services, Executive
Office of Environmental Affairs, 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, Mass. 02202.
Nurnberger, Fred V., Department of Agriculture/Weather Services, 240 Stephen
S. Nisbet Building, 1407 S. Harrison Road, East Lansing, Mich. 48823.
Young, Randall D., Senior Management Analyst Planning, Department of Agri-
culture, 557 State Office Building, St. Paul, Minn. 55337.
Pepper, Jack W.. Water Engineer, Board of Water Commissioners, 416 N. State
Street. Jackson, Miss. 39201.
Ashford, Carolyn, Director, Department of Natural Resources, Box 176, 1014
Madison Street, Jefferson City, Mo. 65101.
1 Based on information received from Conrad G. Keyes, Jr., Executive Director of the
North American Interstate Weather Modification Council ; information was corrected as of
January 30, 1978.
2 Listed alphabetically by State.
(625)
626
Moy, Richard, Weather Modification Program Manager, Department of Natural
Resources and Conservation, Natural Resources Building, 32 South Ewing,
Helena, Mont. 59601.
Kreuscher, Glenn W., Director, Department of Agriculture, P.O. Box 4844, Lin-
coln, Nebr. 68509.
Warblirton, Joseph A., Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada, Stead
Campus, Reno, Nev. 89507.
Gilman, George, Commissioner, Department of Resource and Economic Develop-
ment. State House Annex, Concord, N.H. 03301.
Chummey, Richard, Director, Division of Rural Resources, Department of Agri-
culture, P.O. Box 1888, Trenton, N.J. 0S625.
Holmes, Charles, Secretary, New Mexico Weather Control and Climate Modifica-
tion Commission, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro,
N. Mex. 87801.
Berle, Peter A., Commissioner, Department of Environmental Conservation, 50
Wolf Road, Albany, N.Y. 12233.
Secretarv, Department of Natural and Economic Resources, P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611.
Rose. R. Lynn, Executive Director, North Dakota Weather Modification Board,
P.O. Box 1833, Bismarck, N.Dak. 58505.
Division of Water, Department of Natural Resources, Fountain Square, Colum-
bus, Ohio 43224.
Oklahoma Weather Modification Advisory Committee, Oklahoma Water Resources
Board, Jim Thorpe Building, 5th Floor, Oklahoma City, OkJa. 73105.
Glatt, Jay, Assistant Director, Department of Agriculture, 210 Agriculture Build-
ing, Salem, Oreg. 97310.
Wertz, Fred, Research Analyst, Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, 2301
Cameron Street, Harrisburg, Pa. 17120.
Russ. Robert B., Water Resources Board, Box 2772, Providence. R.I. 02907.
Guess, Clair P., Jr., Executive Director, Water Resources Commission, Box 4515,
3838 Forest Drive, Columbia, S.C. 29204.
Butler. Yern W., Department of Natural Resources Development, Joe Foss Office
Building, Pierre, S.Dak. 57501.
Division of Water Resources, Tennessee Department of Conservation, 6213 Char-
lotte Avenue, Nashville, Tenn. 37209.
Carr, John T., Director, Weather Modification and Technology Division, Texas
1 >epartment of Water Resources. Box 13087, Austin, Tex. 78711.
Summers, Paul C, Cloud Seeding Program Coordinator, Division of Water
Resources, 435 State Capitol Building, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114.
Department of Water Resources, Environmental Conservation Agency, 5 Court
Street, Montpelier, Vt. 05602.
State Air Pollution Control Board, Room 1106, Ninth Street Office Building, Rich-
mond. Va. 23219.
Goodman, Duane, Department of Ecology, 335 General Administration Building,
Olympia, Wash. 98504.
Richards, William E., Executive Director, West Virginia Aeronomy Commission,
Kanawha Airport, Charleston, W.Va. 25311.
Conrad, Marlin S., Plant Industry Division, Department of Agriculture, Trades
and Consumer Protection, 801 W. Badger Road, Madison, Wis. 53713.
Christopulos, George L., State Engineers OflSce. Barrett Building, Second Floor,
Cheyenne, Wyo. 82002.
Appendix F
Agreement on Exchange of Information on Weather Modification
Between the United States of America and Canada
Treaties and Other International Acts Series 8056
Weather Modification — Exchange of Information
Agreement Between the
United States of America and Canada
Signed at Washington March 26, 1975.
note by the department of state
Pursuant to Public Law 89-497, approved July 8, 1966 (80 Stat.
271; 1U.S.C. 113) —
The Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued under the
authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent evidence of
the treaties, international agreements other than treaties, and
proclamations by the President of such treaties and international
agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, therein con-
tained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime jurisdic-
tion, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the United States,
and of the several States, without any further proof or authentica-
tion thereof.
Canada
Weather Modification : Exchange of Information
Agreement signed at Washington March 26, 1975 ; entered into force March 26,
1975.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND CANADA RELATING TO
THE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION ON WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES
The Government of the United States of America and the Government of
Canada,
Aware, because of their geographic proximity, that the effects of weather
modification activities carried out by either Party or its nationals may affect
the territory of the other ;
Noting the diversity of weather modification activities in both the United States
and Canada by private parties, by State and Provincial authorities, and by the
Federal Governments ;
Believing that the existing state of knowledge warrants the expectation of
further development over a period of time in the science and technology of
weather modification ;
Taking into particular consideration the special traditions of prior notification
and consultation and the close cooperation that have historically characterized
their relations ;
Believing that a prompt exchange of pertinent information regarding the
nature and extent of weather modification activities of mutual interest may
facilitate the development of the technology of weather modification for their
mutual benefit ;
Recognizing the desirability of the development of international law relating
to weather modification activities having transboundary effects ;
Have agreed as follows :
Article I
As used in this Agreement :
(a) "Weather modification activities", means activities performed with the
(627)
628
intention of producing artificial changes in the composition, behavior, or dynamics
of the atmosphere ;
(b) "Weather modification activities of mutual interest" means weather
modification activities carried out in or over the territory of a Party within 200
miles of the international boundary ; or such activities wherever conducted,
which, in the judgment of a Party, may significantly affect the composition, be-
havior, or dynamics of the atmosphere over the territory of the other Party ;
(c) "Responsible agencies" means the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-
ministration of the United States and the Atmospheric Environment Service of
Canada, or such other agencies as the Parties may designate ;
(d) "Reporting requirements" means the requirements established by the
domestic laws or regulations of the Parties for reporting to the responsible
agencies information relating to weather modification activities by persons or
entities engaged in weather modification.
Article II
(1) Information relating to weather modification activities of mutual interest
acquired by a responsible agency through its reporting requirements or other-
wise, shall be transmitted as soon as practicable to the responsible agency of the
other Party. Whenever possible, this information shall be transmitted prior to
the commencement of such activities. It is anticipated that such information will
be transmitted within five working days of its receipt by a responsible agency.
(2) Information to be provided by the responsible agencies shall include copies
of relevant reports received through the reporting procedures after the effective
date of this Agreement, and such other information and interpretation as the
responsible agency might consider appropriate.
(3) Nothing herein shall be construed to require transmission to the other
responsible agency of information, the disclosure of which is prohibited by law,
or of information which, in the judgment of the responsible agency, is proprietary
information.
Article III
The responsible agencies shall consult with a view to developing compatible
reporting formats, and to improving procedures for the exchange of information.
Article IV
In addition to the exchange of information pursuant to Article II of this Agree-
ment, each Party agrees to notify and to fully inform the other concerning any
weather modification activities of mutual interest conducted by it prior to the
commencement of such activities. Every effort shall be made to provide such no-
tice as far in advance of such activities as may be possible, bearing in mind the
provisions of Article V of this Agreement.
Article V
The Parties agree to consult, at the request of either Party, regarding particu-
lar weather modification activities of mutual interest. Such consultations shall
be initiated promptly on the request for a Party, and in cases of urgency may be
undertaken through telephonic or other rapid means of communications. Consul-
tations shall be carried out in light of the Parties' laws, regulations, and adminis-
trative practices regarding weather modification.
Article VI
The Parties recognize that extreme emergencies, such as forest fires, may
require immediate commencement by one of them of weather modification ac-
tivities of mutual interest notwithstanding the lack of sufficient time for prior
notification pursuant to Article IV, or for consultation pursuant to Article V. In
such cases, the Party commencing such activities shall notify and fully inform
the other Party as soon as practicable, and shall promptly enter into consulta-
tions at the request of the other Party.
Article VII
Nothing herein relates to or shall be construed to affect the question of re-
sponsibility or liability for weather modification activities, or to imply the
existence of any generally applicable rule of international law.
629
Article VIII
Each Party shall conduct an annual review of this Agreement while it remains
in force, and shall inform the other of its views regarding the Agreement's opera-
tion and effectiveness and the desirability of its amendment to reflect the evolu-
tion of the science and technology of weather modification and of international
law. The Parties shall meet periodically, by mutual agreement, or at the request
of either, to review the implementation of this Agreement or to consider other
issues related to weather modification.
Article IX
This Agreement shall enter into force upon signature. It may be amended by
mutual agreement of the Parties and may be terminated by either Party upon
six months written notice to the other Party.
630
o o
5, ^ t^ro-^- (u
OT3
c5
CO <D CO
05 C"? C
2 «
2 wjq a>
o co
co -
■f c f°
< o
O = i-
too Q.
E -I
03 CO
js a>
E 5.
Q
= 2£
D- Q. o
.2 aT— to
•2<d
'q.2 >-;
o •
cj °6
CO CJ i— 1 ■
id E
<1> co ^,.^1
I ^ c t —
' (£> co
; co cd
O o
■J CPCNJ
• <o<T> o*; cro
oo2.«s= 3 ^ -
co co. Lr °o
<JJ O 0)Jo
< o -
Q.
ra y bj"
^™ E£ -3 n ™-2 8^
c ^^E^3 ^ ~ «
•jt-Q-ooc^cT. 3> </)C0<O
■S 5_ »> E .8 gS»
3 m ra c *r -£= a> co _ >> .
I3*3Kh£|]|B|
_l UJ «t
631
-g ES-I ©"3 -8
*—' Q._c: o = to o
ecnj-o 2 oo cr c o
E.E «E£°!
■ o to ° 2 ^ 2
* — TO — DC <b a. OC 03 — —
o
O £X3 _
■g .2 = 03 0-5 ro O ■
«2 .
»>•» E
= "S TO
a,'a>t?
c gfc 55- E | oi
-co*- E-o_°
E -a-Ke
• "5 o
,cr>
— o E
a> .
4) « 0)
5 >• TO I
<
p-o
£ Em
a) > on
£TOQ-lm TO «
O.S2 o ga=.Si 5 S-O -
3
T3 03
co
- E
03 o
c — — = £ .
c *£ > E OQ .0
=.So« o_o
0 < o
«3-
a>0
^ 0=--TO
-a as <u ct> £= 5?
o —
= TOg »
d</> **ja
i 8 -g, E
: - 03. .
0on'
i&s
o* <a >"
C C 03
0 E =
=>, 03 •
£to
JL m "o
.CM
c/> tj
<J 5^ -o E"a
_ £: . ro E o '
03 COO
00 E^4
= 5 E^oJ to £
TO-S.nj^cTix:'-*;
■5 o GO > 00 ro<.£
< ^
S g g S §^ _-S-S'5.£
3 >- C-O "=*"C Q.° O o u Q. f~~
TO O Q_
•TS TO _
5£.c3=^-ct3
0> -TD 0
E-S_^2:
O
a." o~
C — QQ CO
{J = - CVI
c O 1_ CNJ
-coq Eos
^SSto-'0- I
.E — "S = S. "2
> <=> 0- 00 00 o
O O
03
632
ESS
Daotn>1
re 52
0.2J
-
re -o
a> <u o
a!?
= 2 g.
Q- o. o
5 c
■a 3
uS§3
CD "
en .
c —as
"2
- o
■ re »
:5z
.2 05
S ro re rt « I
o c
>- re
aj —
4 =■
oo
5
^<-o re£
a>_- 5 oi . J=
o1^"^ ere re gf = re-5
So
"S s
c re £=
1^ t/> re — „.-
_ re o evi S»
L J c D E
E ^ a. oo
S3
g* d
ceo 3"
m o aj
= g-.se re
re *-
« J.Ed
'o 2rm
o a>
^ o
vt si
■-•-„-
sj1- .
re^EE
co o <g g
o
o
re aTen-
°-
? £in.
O E «-S gj^oo
<~3. £
o-o g
<>-<<•
5
. — 1 CD
re£-
5^
_ (-o
n
c co
ntir
3 0
2^
w o
O r~~
£ e
o 2
ion
i3
C CO
. o . > > i
QQcvJ5- £
' o e o '
> rro o *= '
"°«> m — '
O -O
co
•E^^o-
— CM -gj
O"£<£>o re
S — -coo
ifigi
00
633
o E
C 2?
.= — -
<
E o , ~ 3* ^ oi
3-z ~ c Q.5 o a-
if;
seS
£0= —
O T3 w
<3
<<°.
CD .
— ' CO
< £
III
-D TO
93
tV, o o.
O SCD
-E cx.-«.fc:^
■go _ro
O ro o tirf"*
_ 03
o b:,
o o,
5 •"£" J
o <
o
n CT) lD
a> — , — ■
o -
-
,. cj<r-^
o
as
o
a.
QO
<
OO
<
;red hopper
id blower-
3anegen-
rators.
erators (15
imotely con-
olled, 20
lanual).
c <ZSs t
"O
<u
o
tS
.o
c 5>
IS C
■o
c
=j
o
■a
>_ a>
<£ Q.
<
o
<5
o
o
o
o"
o
o
o
o
ro
o
Seattle-Tacoma
Airport, Wash.
Southwest Utah.
Southeast San
Juan Moun-
tains, Colo.
id
Old
en
1974, ti
24, 19/
:t. 1,
Mar.
^ EL
o <
03
o
o
O
2
c i22-o' » S
t QJ _ 03 — L.
ro ro
5 o=
S o2
£cn .
O o r^.
tJ~z ccr>
E= o pen >,
ro 03 £~ ro
E§<
1 g<
03 -O
5 .± ._ t
i_ <c <a; to to
E. °-_r -E^ °
m.y »- aj = <r -o — ro r?
01-1- oo pr^QOcn c:ll-J2
E<!=ou2--E .< r |-o»
O , IijIq £ oo-o-'i ,3 ^ -!
"MEjiSo.E.ES
3lu<c>cq5'5S 5q§
S° 2
S-<cn
< r
If s
ro<°S
oJ" - tn
yCQ_ro
- ro E Si°-o
CXI
5oo
5 -
ran, i_ CJ
o ro e-^jr g
O o
Q- 00
,o5
■o o"
: g
C o
ro Q-cr>
u-ooco
E 03rK
^ S 03 0- ro
CD
: C n 03 ■
'(jQU
--E
O ilf) 03 - "CO
O m
O-Sf- w ' ro —
a3!-iroroo!-
^ ^ Eo°°E- -~
< o to. «.2 '
x: o = "~
j- ro
5-^
O Q. -
250
03
<
CJlO -
^ X O
CO)
o — 1
<_) r-l
00 LD
c: cn
old
00
= 0
= 0
o ^
= -2
O-D
CM C f
Ol — O «
L^2
S o
634
2 gg
o> j=
CO 00/
go-
al
• to
a. a>
o °a
CL.
c o
ol
E 5 3=75 5
2 <=
73 o
■t2o
CO id
>«3 SO
O
CTJ _
*~ ' IT)
co
CO to
So
CO
O < C
• — aj co <g
lOZU. g. Q>
CO
LT5 -
cr> co
O —
2««'
1-1 a.
o ■
To
2o
ca^ ..2 coai
_ r- oo r-~.
o" — 5> in •
« 8 »*
5Sl.iS<
_h-o = .
gf2i
.±2 »— "S oo
a
en _
m
^00
o> co Sj£f"^
co 2 2 ct. *J
0J O E •— ' Q.
.- =, £ CO CO ^ ■£
cj^ c Q_ 5 coo CD
cd o"5 b|
C 2" " CO
■— c o. co
0 _^ <r ^
S CO O.CD =3
= O
— CO
o So
^j-^-< CD if -
i/>0Q ^- ' CD oO —
E Q5 00.2- -o> p •= cn ojcq c
to CD Q_ fc CNJ
-a E
r_CO*- = CD_o_
£^ = = 0 <d "s^; j
O > ^ O 75 >IDQ
a too
5o .
_ 'l3q7B |
co o o cs-t
O CD0- 00;
±: " 3 o . i 0 «
«2HOy5 ^2 7d 00
Q O
— -° S°
0J c nn
E CD m C1-
635
1 1 ki 1 1
Q Q q 00
118
S o g
3« I"* « .
>- o e ro *= r-.
_a> u _ S: is — -
o
E .
•J I . ^
" 4E . ir.-co S •<= .
£=-.E Q-fetS S " « rS » = '
:2'S=<S2
111
2.9 9-
ir xJ2
O20O
Eg
x
o _
3"
■ o — 0
d>j°:.i ««fes
00
o> . sz cj 2 —
o> x a> "j; Q —
o
fS||s-||l^ 1
£iHe£ siSs
; oq-Q-o_2 >
: a- ^=
c r-».
— 00 a
2 000 ^
: e e*=-
636
2= o
re <2
o -a
<5
5 S 2 3 ^ , S
I as ' 3s i • mX: ®
5«o o «i s ""o o a>i
3 "E
3 o as
a. e.
c S
o
O
5
= £5
re t.
a> o
o re
O Q
St
£ 5
5
5?T3
!"2 £
E o -2 ^ff 're c- ^ 00
"rea5-SS? j2 re UJ ^^Si
— tv.
co i— a) oo >— i
re a>win re ^m^- '
5 C^^.E j£USr-l o
c're.2<T>irT c'S.eoi^r13,
= C 00 0>«TH
o j=_ c-^cr>
"re £ '«5.2-Hbi
~ ro to o>5in'
'3 c = >- =J of
qj a) re 0. — 1 4- — •
-co . £-o,2 -S2~ ■ po £ Q
2 o 000
00^
is.sir!
a> o ?r£i5«~o "a ^= .2- _,-
loco"1
! E Ess.
5°
>0 re
2 r- Q
E5 £ re
< 2 o<z
> c: ts
™ T3 (U r? °>
J: a>.J , a> 00
aOZ0- -T 0)
>• r- • • — r-~ re XJ e
= P — goo c c =1
^ I -re
£ 5 2lo • 2"§ = •
f ■§ aSz 2;<^Z
utt: °z
a>
to "9 2
637
E
OS
a, o
<
05 11
re -2
— re
«3 O
"*? 2
o 00
o
re _
jQ ^
o
o
o
o
ID
CSI
o
co
to'
LT>
OO
-central
jlaware.
ot County,
ich.
jr
o
S
Si
re
LU
2S
o
O LO
2 in
lune 1, 1975,
Aug. 31, 19;
une 15, 197
Aug. 31, 1
....do.....
E °P2i
.S«-
.2 3*
1 o <^>
32<
c re^.,
« 03
E= .
c/5 > Si
oaCC re
10
E ScoC-
c o =3 0cri
°ro ■**
TO •— ' iD
03 '
> <£ CO
31 >W
03 aj CTJ
£.3 o°
C3
r E
e-Ere
03 "5 -
£ o E Si •
§■«" >.5S'
— ^ £
C3 — > «g °-CNi
ijUlflll
c re 5
S » g
52.
< z:
core E§5«S»w|Stf!
"Oro
:2 £ re ci.
.•■SOW.
< .
O LO
2<0
5 P ™
5
g-|i2
'J2 re
x cr>
on
"E »f
^ o ^- o
34-S57— 79-
-43
638
C3.CsJCJ.-h 1
co o o ©
51
05 o l
CD >s I
o-o
c5
'<
o5
^_ to *-*
° to^
"Coo
E - TO
.£<<
O
to
o o ro
a. a. i-
!= o 9?
O ID
-CD
CO ~i
r>- .
cd ^
TO £'«J Q>2 ^(
occ ~ ' 1 -
CD CD CO
aZ
C/1 _ CO I — ■ — Z
CD
- 2 = iucn-c
« to . o a. .
i-5§°2.=°<
5 =s
o - oo
>0
= zl =0
O CD O .
— 2 *-
s's = i
— .2 = i
= TO>
. TO
"If 2
" >> o e Sj
. - roO>
— ti TO-c «2 co
.-cd =
— 1 I T-
03
go
o . _z
J lT> ' CO
: I*- in O i_ c X <D
>- oT <C o qq to •
u a. % IcS . g-g
^ee to .gaJ^g?
a cd ro _ -< _
v_ -O 00 „• O — CD .TO
CD TO .2 03 = r-. ^
E . • u.t;N ro
J= . gcsj
to "5m
J2a.' E
— " CL CD O "E, <
-g o cd <• t; — 2:
E°-=?siS =
15 01% J- C
".5 = E</Js g
• Q. LU CD .*= 1=
_ m c - .^c
^<:CrooCOCVJ<->
-a o o c ■— <r •—
to ™= to to
q *2 c3 oo
■a )P A to I
d - . = £ £o c"3-
>- 1 — _cz c ro cd ro k
- O a->
2 CDS <
2 O — £= C
oO Q CD -
cd o c . roOQ E ro «
>00ro2 o-o -2
So SN to o "ro ^ 2r— ce — «
O ■ O-CD "~ — -2 — 5^ TO C
i2 oo -J
639
- So o
o 2 2
D-in
i — ^ o cd oo co <d c:
;< Saro^ o o m
j2 s>
3X3
<2 <B
C ^- <D _
a. o. a> — tz
o o m5 n
!_ -a w co ,«
« 2"gi c o
=> c g E >-
S2»
il OO Q.
<
2"°
u->
c — ca c 00 co
g « CO
5 S
S§»-=«5S £JS
a p: 3~ >,
Z OO) O ^ »!
cd-^""^ °s<
H . aj o r .
_cnj< " Q-^co
co lt> —i o
,^cnajoo .
: g--^ * S
• - ro ^ CO
! *S75 & -too
CD oo
"Kit,
a.
-a co
co CO
1-2 "
--n CO
5 Sao,
co a. ■
co ><<£>
o 15 ^
Sz°2 2
"QS,
-Isl 2
o
O 00
° r— io^
2 s£
S2i
co cd £ td
CO™'- .
£ S o
3 a "oO oo
CD C 2 CO
*; a> oo
co P
o£ "2
T3 5 Lu 00 cR ~ = < <
CM .— '
— ^
on H-
o a> -
TO
O .!=!
— CO oo
CD C5 CD
co^jo^o^ g^-g §< .E
c^ao ^43
,± > ao"
,ra|«o^
f= cdoo— -
:o E
CO -w co
■c cd c
z: co — co
.2-n<C-)
CT>
'<
oo'
i_ o ao co
: <'^<<
<5 ooc^r
i_ o
CD
CXJOO
°cjo "
— i cT5
gS— cd E gS = s r "oo >
>«§|2 2£^d-l
00 00c
_C^CD
O 0) n
> O .
CO •— <— )
0-cn
CD
U — i
oouo
640
™2 0
in — ?o>
ir> o
2S
I- c: c
, O rr QJ
MM
T3 II O)
c o £
= ■— E,
P TO o
00
— o>
re c
£■5
■o —
is
£
2
^-O.-P.
§■2
! o •
< » s .
i<5
c o
1!=
©ir>
tn2
Q
,J3 . .-1 1
!r o O)
oc ro
.E <m-S,<
-r-r c => c
c
o
Q
_ S3 cm*"S J> -9.
'.iei
ft. <=*_- c pc; MC'J^,
g.2 -<
5 5 5:
0m E —
ra <->
;< °:
ra <r
CD {_)
*-"o o
— C OO o
— 'Zl GO
«5 ,1
J £° =
53 c""o
^ ra^-O*
8.25^ =
S'= :«=>
~ > t=
cu'e —
2=5
— x_.
« §.
W< .
_ TO CO
s
00 ro r
O ! M
o ra
=
°j 5
-.5 22
r-aoO
= o
ra b
O —
t_ ra o
3 E
< cO ■
— goO
00^
<o -cr>
iro ra
— o-^:
ra0 ra
»- CNJ
Appendix H
Selected Bibliography of Publications in Weather
Modification
American Meteorological Society. Proceedings of the First National Conference
on Weather Modification, April 28-May 1, 1968, Albany, New York. Boston,
1968. 532 p.
. Second National Conference on Weather Modification, April 6-9, 1970,
Santa Barbara, California (preprints). Boston, 1970. 440 p.
■ . Proceedings of the International Conference on Weather Modification,
September 6-11, 1971, Canberra, Australia. Sponsored jointly by the American
Meteorological Society and the Australian Academy of Science. Boston, 1971.
373 p.
. Third Conference on Weather Modification, June 26-29, 1972, Rapid City,
South Dakota (preprints). Boston, 1972. 336 p.
. Fourth Conference on Weather Modification. November 18-21, 1974, Fort
Lauderdale, Florida (preprints). Boston, 1974. 575 p.
. Abstracts of Special Regional Weather Modification Conference : Aug-
mentation of Winter Orographic Precipitation in the Western United States,
November 11-13, 1975, San Francisco, California. (Co-sponsored by the U.S.
Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation ; State of California,
Department of Water Resources; and the Weather Modification Association.)
Boston, 1975. 245 p.
■ . Sixth Conference on Planned and Inadvertent Weather Modification,
October 10-13. 1977. Champaign. Illinois. Boston. 1977. 396 p.
Barrett, Earl W. Inadvertent weather and climate modification. Critical reviews
. in environmental control, v. 6. no. 1, December 1975 : 15-90.
Battan. Louis J. Harvesting the clouds : advances in weather modification. Gar-
den City. New York, Doubleday and Company, 1969. (The Science Study
Series) 148 p.
Changnon. Stanley A.. Jr.. Ray Jay Davis, Barbara C. Farhar, J. Eugene Haas,
J. Loreena Ivens. Martin Y. Jones. Donald A. Klein, Dean Mann. Griffith M.
Morgan. Jr.. Steven T. Sonka. Earl R. Swanson, C. Robert Taylor, and Jon
Van Blokland. Hail suppression : impacts and issues. Urbana, Illinois, Illinois
State Water Survey, April 1977. 432 p.
Changnon, Stanley A.. Floyd A. Huff. Paul T. Schickedanz. and John T. Yogel.
Summary of METROMEX, Volume 1 : weather anomalies and impacts. Bulle-
tin 62. State of Illinois. Department of Registration and Education. (ISWS/
BUL-62/77) Urbana. Illinois. Illinois State Water Survey. 1977. 260 p.
Charak. Mason T. and Mary T. DiGiulian. Weather modification activity reports ;
November 1. 1972. to December 31, 1973. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. Office of Environmental Monitoring and Prediction. Rockville,
Maryland. March 1974. 40 p.
Charak. Mason T. Weather modification activity reports: calendar year 1974.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Office of Environmental
Monitoring and Prediction. Rockville, Maryland. March 1975. 37 p.
. Weather modification activity reports ; calendar year 1975. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Office of Environmental Monitoring
and Prediction. Rockville. Maryland. June 1976. 64 p.
Comptroller General of the United States. Need for a national weather modifica-
tion research program. Report to the Congress. Washington, U.S. General
Accounting Office. August 23. 1974. (B-133202). 64 p.
Cooper. Charles F. and William C. Jolly. Ecological effects of weather modifi-
cation : a problem analvsis. Ann Arbor, Michigan. Universitv of Michigan, May
1969. 160 p.
Dennis. A. S. and A. Gagin. Recommendations for future research in weather
modification. U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmos-
(641)
642
pheric Administration. Environmental Research Laboratories. Weather Modi-
fication. Program Office. Boulder, Colorado, November 1977. 112 p.
Dorsey, Thomas A. and W. Henry Lambright. Citizen participation mechanisms
and weather modification policy : a survey. Final report to the National Science
Foundation. (SRC TR78-516/NSF OSS77-19066) Syracuse, New York, Syra-
cuse Research Corporation, April 1978. 169 p.
Elliott, Robert D., Russell W. Shaffer, Arnold Court, and Jack F. Hannaford,
Colorado River Basin Pilot Project ; comprehensive evaluation report : five-
seasons, 1970-1971 . . . 1974-1975. Prepared for the U.S. Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Division of Atmospheric Water Resources
Management. Goleta, California, Aerometrics, Inc., October 1976. (report no.
ARI-76-1) 650 p.
Fleagle, Robert G. (editor). Weather modification: science and public policy.
Seattle. University of Washington Press, 1968. 147 p.
Fleagle, Robert G., James A. Crutchfield, Ralph W. Johnson, and Mohamed F.
Abdo. Weather modification in the public interest. (Published by the American
Meteorological Society and the University of Washington Press) Seattle, U. of
Washington Press, 1974. 88 p.
Grant. Lewis O. and John D. Reid (compilers). Workshop for an Assessment
of the Present and Potential Role of Weather Modification in Agricultural
Production, July 15-18, 1975, Ft. Collins, Colorado. Colorado State University,
August 1975. 236 p.
Griffiths, John F. and M. Joan Griffiths. Bibliography of the urban modification
of the atmosphere and hydrologie environment. College Station, Texas, Texas
A & M University, Department of Meteorology, February 1974. 100 p.
Grimes, Annie E. An annotated bibliography on weather modification, 1960-1969.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Data Serv-
ice, Environmental Science Information Center. Rockville, Maryland. 1972
( NO AA technical memorandum EDS ESIC-1) 407 p.
Ilc-is. Wilmot N. (editor). Weather and climate modification. New York, John
Wiley and Sons, 1974. 842 p. (Contains 22 chapters on various aspects of
weather modification, contributed by experts in various phases of the field.)
Halacy, Daniel S., Jr. The weather changers. New York, Harper and Row, 1968.
246 p.
Hromocky, Alexander. Weather modification (bibliography). Library of Congress
Science Tracer Bullet. (TB 75-5) . Washington, June 1975. 13 p.
Justus, John R. A bibliography of selected Federal and congressional publica-
tions on weather modification. Congressional Research Service. Library of
Congress. January 14. 1977. 4 p.
Kellogg, William W. Is mankind warming the Earth? Bulletin of the atomic
scientists, v. 34. February 1978: 10-19.
Klein, D. A. (editor). Environmental impacts of nucleating agents used in
weather modification. Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, Dowden, Hutchison, and
Ross (in press).
Matthews, W. II.. W. W. Kellogg, and G. D. Robinson, editors. Man's impact on
the climate. Cambridge. MIT Press, 1971. 594 p.
National Center for Atmospheric Research. National Hail Research Experiment
randomized seeding experiment, 1972-1974: final report. Boulder, Colorado,
December 1976. In five volumes. 260 + 530 4- 313 + 326 + 207 p.
. The National Hail Research Experiment: summer 1976 summary report.
Boulder, Colorado, December 1977. (NCAR-71 00-77/2.) 217 p.
National Research Council. Committee on Atmospheric Sciences. Panel on
Weather and Climate Modification. Weather and climate modifications: prob-
lems and prospects, (in two volumes) Washington, National Academy of
Sciences. 1966. (Publication No. 1350.) 40 + 212 p.
. Weather and climate modification: problems and progress. Washington,
National Academy of Sciences, 1973. (ISBN 0-309-02121-9). 280 p.
U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research Program. Under-
derstanding climatic change: a program for action. Washington, National
Academy Of Sciences, 1975, 239 p.
Geophysics Research Board. Energy and climate. Washington, National
Academy of Sciences. 1977, 281 p.
Newell. Homer E. A recommended national program in weather modification.
Federal Council for Science and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee for
Atmospheric Sciences. (I CAS report no. 10a). Washington, November 19GG.
93 p.
643
North American Interstate Weather Modification Council. Conference on Weather
Modification— a Usable Technology ; its Potential Impact on the World Food
Crisis. January 16-17, 1975, Denver, Colorado. (Pub. 75-1). 150 p.
. . Conference on Weather Modification, Today and Tomorrow. Second an-
nual meeting of the NAIWMC, January 15-16, 1976, Kansas City, Missouri.
(Pub. no. 76-1). 119 p.
■ . Legal uncertainties and legislation in weather modification. Special and
third annual meetings of the Council. August 5-6, 1976 and December 2-3. 1976,
both in Denver, Colorado. (NAIWMC Pub. no. 77-1.) Las Cruces, New Mexico,
September 1977. 173 p.
Robinson, G. D. (editor). Report on the Third Inadvertent Weather Modification
Workshop, Hartford, Connecticut, May 23-27, 1977. (CEM Report 4215-
604) Hartford, Connecticut, The Center for the Environment and Man, No-
vember 1977. 167 p.
Sewell, W. R. D., et al. Modifying the weather: a social assessment. Western
geographical series, vol. 9. Victoria, British Columbia, University of Victoria,
July 1973. 349 p.
Smith, Ivan C. and Bonnie L. Carson. Trace metals in the environment : vol. 2,
silver. Ann Arbor, Michigan, Ann Arbor Science Publishers, 1977. 490 p.
Special Commission on Weather Modification. Weather and climate modification.
Report to the National Science Foundation. NSF 66-3. Washington, D.C., De-
cember 20, 1965. 155 p.
State of South Dakota. Department of Natural Resources Development. Division
of Weather Modification. Conference on Weather Modification in the United
States ; Potential and Problems for Interstate Action. Sioux Falls, South Da-
kota, June 10-12, 1974, 248 p.
(This conference, called by the Governor of South Dakota, was attended
by officials from 23 States and from the Canadian Province of Alberta and
resulted in the formation of the North American Interstate Weather Modifica-
tion Council.)
Steinhoff, Harold W. and Jack D. Ives (editors). Ecological impacts of snow-
pack augmentation in the San Juan Mountains, Colorado. Final report of the
San Juan Ecology Project to the Bureau of Reclamation. Prepared by Colorado
State University, Fort Collins, Colorado; University of Colorado, Boulder,
. Colorado; and Fort Lewis College, Durango, Colorado, March 9. 1976. 489 p.
Taubenfeld, Howard J. (editor). Controlling the weather; a study of law and
regulatory processes. New York, Dunellen, 1970. 275 p.
Thomas, William A. (editor), Legal and scientific uncertainties of weather modi-
fication. (Proceedings of a symposium convened at Duke University, March 11-
12, 1976, by the National Conference of Lawyers and Scientists.) Durham,
North Carolina, Duke University Press, 1977. 155 p.
U.S. Advisory Committee on Weather Control. Final report of the Advisory
Committee on Weather Control, (in two volumes) Washington, U.S. Govt.
Print. Off.. December 31, 1957. 32 4- 422 p. (Volume II contains 2259 refer-
ences on U.S. and foreign works on weather modification and related subjects
through 1957.)
U.S. Congress. House of Representatives. Committee on Science and Technology.
Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere. Weather modification.
Hearings, 94th Congress, 2d session. June 15, 16, 17, and 18, 1976. (No. 79)
Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1976. 524 p.
U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Commerce. Subcommittee on Oceans and
Atmosphere. Atmospheric Research Control Act. Hearing. 94th Congress, 2d
session, on S. 2705. S. 2706, and S. 2707. February 17, 1976. Washington. U.S.
Govt. Print. Off.. 1976. 297 p.
U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-
tion. Summary report: weather modification; fiscal years 1969. 1970. 1971.
Office of the Assistant Administrator for Environmental Monitoring and Pre-
diction. Rockville, Maryland. May 1973. 163 p.
. Summary report: weather modification: fiscal year 1972. Office of En-
vironmental Monitoring and Prediction. Rockville, Marvland, November 1973.
226 p.
. Summary report : weather modification ; fiscal year 1973. Office of En-
vironmental Monitoring and Prediction. Rockville, Maryland, December 1974.
154 p.
■•. Draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for the hurricane ameliora-
tion research project. Rockville, Maryland, February 1978. 192 p.
644
U.S. Department of Commerce. Environmental Data Service. Weather modifica-
tion (bibliography). Packaged literature search 77-1. Washington, D.C., April
1977. (NOAA-S/T 77-2759) , 159 p.
. Environmental Research Laboratories. Weather Modification Program
Office. Collected reprints: 1975-1976. Boulder, Colorado, May 1977. 667 p.
(This is a volume of collected reprints published by NOAA's Weather Modifi-
cation Program Office, including reports of research directed and supported
by WMPO that appeared in 1975 and 1976 as journal articles or in conference
proceedings as well as some unpublished documentation otherwise difficult to
obtain; abstracts are included of papers published in the NOAA Technical
Report and Technical Memorandum series.)
U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. Division of Atmospheric
Water Resources Management. Project Skywater : 1973-74 biennial report.
Denver, December 1976. (REC-ERC-76-21.)
. Precipitation, man, and the environment ; an overview of Skywater IX
Conference, Vail, Colorado, second week of November 1976. Denver, September
1977. 223 p. (This is the latest published proceedings of a series of Skywater
Conferences, the first of which was held in Denver in July 1967 : the most
recent Skywater X Conference was held in June 1978 at Lake Tahoe,
California.
. Final environmental statement for Project Skywater ; a program of re-
search in precipitation management. Division of Atmospheric Water Resources
Management. (INT FES 77-39.) Denver, October 25, 1977. In three volumes.
376 + 316 + 266 p.
U.S. Domestic Council. Environmental Resources Committee. Subcommittee on
Climate Change. The Federal role in weather modification. Washington, 1975.
39 p.
U.S. Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology.
Committee on Atmosphere and Oceans. A United States climate program plan.
Washington, 1977. 81 p. (ICAS 20b-FY 77)
U.S. Federal Council for Science and Technology. Interdepartmental Committee
for Atmospheric Sciences. A national program for accelerating progress in
weather modification. (ICAS report no. 15a.) Washington, June 1971. 50 p.
U.S. Federal Council for Science and Technology and Council on Environmental
Quality. Fluorocarbons and the environment. Report of the Federal Task Force
on Inadvertent Modification of the Stratosphere (IMOS). Washington, U.S.
Govt. Print. Off., 1975. 109 p.
U.S. Library of Congress. Legislative Reference Service. Weather modification
and control ; a report prepared by Lawton M. Hartman for the use of the Com-
mittee on Commerce, U.S. Senate. (89th Congress, 2d session, Senate. Report
no. 1139.) Washington. U.S. Govt. Print. Off.. 1966. 181 p.
U.S. Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service. A primer on climatic
variation and change. Prepared for the Subcommittee on the Environment and
the Atmosphere of the Committee on Science and Technology. U.S. House of
Representatives. 94th Congress, 2d session. September 1976. Washington. U.S.
Govt. Print. Off.. 1976. 403 p.
Weisbecker, Leo W. (compiler). The impacts of snow enhancement: technology
assessment of winter orographic snowpack augmentation in the upper Colo-
rado River basin. Norman, Oklahoma, University of Oklahoma Press, 1974.
624 p.
White. Fred D. Highlights of solicited opinions on weather modification (a sum-
mary). (Prepared for use of the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Modi-
fication Advisory "Board: summarized from background papers on various
aspects of weather modification, solicited from 17 experts in various phases of
weather modification.) U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration. Rockville. Maryland, March 1977. 39 p.
Wtt on, Carroll L.. editor. Man's impact on the global environment. Report of the
Study of Critical Environmental Problems (SCEP). Cambridge, MIT Press,
1070. 319 p.
Wilson, C. L. and W. H. Matthews, editors. Inadvertent climate modification. Re-
port of the Study of Man's Impact on Climate (SMIC). Cambridge. MIT Press,
1071. 308 p.
Woodley, William L. and Robert T. Sax. The Florida Area Cumulus Experiment-
rationale, design, procedures, results, and future course. U.S. Department of
Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Environmental
Research Laboratories. (NOAA technical report ERL 354-WMPO 6.) Boulder,
Colorado, January 1076. 204 p.
645
World Meteorological Organization. Proceedings of the WMO/IAMAP Scientific
Conference on Weather Modification, October 1-7, 1973, Tashkent, USSR.
Geneva, 1974. (WMO No. 399.) 566 p.
. Papers presented at the Second WMO Scientific Conference on Weather
Modification, August 2-6, 1976, Boulder, Colorado. Geneva, 1976. (WMO No.
443.) 597 p.
. Weather Modification Programme. Plan for the Precipitation Enhance-
ment Project (PEP). PEP report No. 3. Geneva, November 1976. 43 p.
. Register of national weather modification projects : 1976. Geneva, 1977.
28 p.
Appendix I
Public Laws Dealing Specifically With Weather Modification
August 13. 1953 Public Law 256 — Chapter 426
IS. 285]
AN ACT To create a committee to study and evaluate public and private
experiments in weather modification.
Weather modi- Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
FvaVnation United States of America in Congress assembled,
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND POLICY
Research and experimentation in the field of weather modifica-
tion and control have attained the stage at which the applica-
tion of scientific advances in this field appears to be practical.
The effect of the use of measures for the control of weather phe-
nomena upon the social, economic, and political structures of
today, and upon national security, cannot now be determined. It is
a field in which unknown factors are involved. It is reasonable
to anticipate, however, that modification and control of weather,
if effective on a large scale, would cause profound changes in our
present way of life and would result in vast and far-reaching
benefits to agriculture, industry, commerce, and the general wel-
fare and common defense.
While the ultimate extent to which weather modification and
control may be utilized is speculative, the application of such
measures without proper safeguards, sufficient data and accurate
information may result in inadequate or excessive precipitation ;
may cause catastrophic droughts, storms, floods, and other
phenomena with consequent loss of life and property, injury to
navigable streams and other channels of interstate and foreign
commerce, injury to water supplies for municipal, irrigation, and
industrial, purposes, and injury to sources of hydroelectric power :
may otherwise impede the production and transportation of goods
and services for domestic consumption and export and for the
national defense; and may otherwise adversely affect the gen-
eral welfare and common defense.
Thorough experimentation and full-scale operations in weather
modification and control will of necessity affect areas extending
across State and possibly across national boundaries. The Con-
gress, therefore, recognizes that experimentation and applica-
tion of such measures are matters of national and international
concern.
Accordingly, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Con-
press, in order to effect the maximum benefit which may result
from experiments and operations designed to modify and control
went her. to correlate and evaluate the information derived from
such activity and to cooperate with the several States and the
duly authorized officials thereof with respect to such activity, all
to the end of encouraging the intelligent experimentation and the
beneficial development of weather modification and control, pre-
venting its harmful and indiscriminate exercise, and fostering
sound economic conditions in the public interest.
CREATION OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON WEATHER CONTROL
Sec. 2. There is hereby established a national committee to he
known as the Advisory Committee on Weather Control (herein-
after called the "Committee").
(G46)
647
Sec. 3. The Committee shall make a complete study and evalua-
tion of public and private experiments in weather control for the
purpose of determining the extent to which the United States
should experiment with, engage in, or regulate activities designed
to control weather conditions.
Sec. 4. The Committee shall be composed of the Secretary of
Defense or his designee, the Secretary of Agriculture or his
designee, the Secretary of Commerce or his designee, the Secre-
tary of the Interior or his designee, the Director of the National
Science Foundation or his designee, the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare or his designee, and five members ap-
pointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of
the Senate, from among persons in private life of outstanding
ability in the fields of science, agriculture, and business. A
vacancy in the Committee shall not affect its powers but shall be
tilled in the same manner that the original appointment was made.
Sec. 5. The President shall appoint the Chairman and Vice
Chairman of the Committee. The Chairman shall be appointed
from among those persons appointed to the Committee from
private life.
Sec 6. The Committee shall hold at least two meetings a year,
approximately six months apart, and. on due notice, shall meet at
such other times as the Committee may determine. Six members
of the Committee shall constitute a quorum.
Sec. 7. The members of the Committee who are in the executive
branch of the Government shall receive no additional compensa-
tion for their services on the Committee. The members from
private life shall each receive $50 per diem when engaged in the
performance of duties vested in the Committee. All members of
the Committee sball be reimbursed in accordance with the Travel
Expense Act of 1949, as amended, for travel, subsistence, and
other necessary expenses incurred by them in the performance of
duties vested in the Committee.
Sec. S. The Committee shall have power to appoint and fix the
compensation of such officers and employees as may be necessary
to carry out the functions of the Committee, including one execu-
tive secretary at a salary not exceeding $12,000 per annum.
Officers and employees other than the executive secretary shall be
appointed in accordance with the Classification Act of 1949, as
amended, except that to the extent the Committee deems such
action necessary to. the discharge of its responsibilities, personnel
for positions requiring scientific or special qualifications may be
employed and their compensation fixed without regard to such
laws. The Committee shall make adqeuate provision for adminis-
trative review of any determination to dismiss any employee.
Sec. 9. (a) The Committee, or any member thereof, may. for the
purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act. hold such
hearings and sit and act at such times and places, and take such
testimony as the Committee shall deem advisable. Any member
of the Committee may administer oaths or affirmations to wit-
nesses appearing before the Committee or before such member.
(b) The Committee is authorized to secure directly from any
executive department, bureau, agency, board, commission, office,
independent establishment, or instrumentality information, sug-
gestions, estimates, and statistics for the purpose of this Act ; and
each such department, bureau, agency, board, commission, office,
establishment, or instrumentality is authorized and directed to
furnish such information, suggestions, estimates, and statistics
directly to the Committee, upon request made by the Chairman
or Vice Chairman.
(c) The Committee may, with the consent of the agency con-
cerned, accept and utilize, on a reimbursable basis, the personnel
of any other agency of the Federal Government.
(d) (1) The Committee shall be entitled by regulation, subpena,
or otherwise, to obtain such information from, require such reports
and the keeping of such records by, and make such inspection of
Members.
Meetings.
Compensation.
63 Stat. 160.
5 USC S35 note.
Officers and
employees.
63 Stat. 954.
5 USC 1071
note.
Hearings.
Information,
etc., from
agencies.
Personnel of
other agencien.
Information
from persons.
648
Witness fees.
Penalty.
Confidential
information.
Use of mails.
Report.
Termination
date.
Appropriation.
the books, records, and other writings, premises or property of,
any person as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the
provisions of this Act, but this authority shall not be exercised if
adequate and authoritative data are available from any Federal
agency. In case of contumacy by, or refusal to obey a subpena
served upon, any person referred to in this subsection, the district
court of the United States for any district in which such person
is found or resides or transacts business, upon application by the
Committee, shall have jurisdiction to issue an order requiring such
person to appear and give testimony or to appear and produce doc-
uments, or both : and any failure to obey such order of the court
may be punished by such court as a contempt thereof.
(2) The production of a person's books, records, or other docu-
mentary evidence shall not be required at any place other than
the place where such person usually keeps them, if, prior to the
return date specified in the regulations, subpena, or other docu-
ment issued with respect thereto, such person furnishes the Com-
mittee with a true copy of such books, records, or other documen-
tary evidence (certified by such person under oath to be a true
and correct copy) or enters into a stipulation with the Committee
as to the information contained in such books, records, or other
documentary evidence. Witnesses shall be paid the same fees and
mileage that are paid witnesses in the courts of the United States.
(3) Any person who willfully performs any act prohibited or
willfully fails to perform any act required by the above provisions
of this subsection, or any rule, regulation, or order thereunder,
shall upon conviction be fined not more than $500 for each offense.
(4) Information obtained under this Act which the Committee
deems confidential for purposes of national security or other
reasons or with reference to which a request for confidential treat-
ment is made by the person or agency furnishing such information,
shall not be published or disclosed unless the Committee deter-
mines that the withholding thereof is contrary to the purposes of
this Act, and any member or employee of the Committee willfully
violating this provision shall, upon conviction, be fined not more
than $5,000.
( e) The Committee shall be entitled to the free use of the United
Stales mails in the same manner as the other executive agencies
of the Government.
Sec. 10. (a) The Committee shall from time to time submit a
report on its findings and recommendations to the President for
submission to the Congress. At the earliest possible moment, the
Committee shall submit a report to the President for submission to
the Congress on the advisability of the Federal Government regu-
lating, by means of licenses or otherwise, those who attempt to
engage in activities designed to modify or control the weather.
The Committee shall submit a final report to the President for
submission to the Congress not. later than June 30, 1056.
(b) Thirty days after the Committee has submitted such final
report to the President, the Committee shall cease to exist.
Sec 11. There are authorized to be appropriated, from any
funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as
the Congress may from time to time deem necessary to carry out
the provisions of this Act.
Approved August 13, 1953.
July o. inse
[8. 29131
15 USC 811
note.
Public Law 661— Chapter 522
AN ACT To oxtend for two years the Advisory Committee on Weather
Control.
Be it enacted hi/ the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled. That section
10 1 a I of the Act entitled "An Act to create a committee to study
and evaluate public and private experiments in weather modifica-
tion", approved August 13. 1953 (67 Stat. 551). 561). is anieuded
by striking out ''.June 30, 1056" and inserting in lieu thereof "June
30, 1058".
Approved July 9, 1956.
649
Public Law 85-510
AX ACT To amend the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, to pro- fH1^,*}' 195S
vide for a program of study, research, and evaluation in the field of kE: bbi
weather modification.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That sub-
section (a) of section 3 of the National Science Foundation Act of
1950. as amended, is amended by striking out "and" at the end of
paragraph (7), by striking out the period at the end of paragraph
(8) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon, and by adding after
paragraph (8) the following new paragraph:
"(9) to initiate and support a program of study, research,
and evaluation in the held of weather modification, giving
particular attention to areas that have experienced floods,
drought, hail, lightning, fog, tornadoes, hurricanes, or other
weather phenomena, and to report annually to the President
and the Congress thereon."
Sec. 2. The National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as
amended, is amended by changing the designations of sections 14,
15, and 16 (and all reference to such sections in any provision of
law) to 15, 16, and 17, respectively, and by inserting after section
13 the following section :
"weather modification
"Sec. 14. (a) In carrying out the provisions of paragraph (9)
of section 3 (a), the Foundation shall consult with meteorologists
and scientists in private life and with agencies of Government
interested in, or affected by, experimental research in the field
of weather control.
"(b) Research programs to carry out the purposes of such
paragraph (9), whether conducted by the Foundation or by other
Government agencies or departments, may be accomplished
through contracts with, or grants to, private or public institutions
or agencies, including but not limited to cooperative programs
with any State through such instrumentalities as may be desig-
nated by the governor of such State.
"(c) For the purposes of such paragraph (9), the Foundation
is authorized to accept as a gift, money, material, or services :
Provided, That notwithstanding section 11(f), use of any such
gift, if the donor so specifies, may be restricted or limited to cer-
tain projects or areas.
"(d) For the purposes of such paragraph (9), other agencies of
the Government are authorized to loan to the Foundation without
reimbursement, and the Foundation is authorized to accept and
make use of, such property and personnel as may be deemed
useful, with the approval of the Director of the Bureau of the
Budget.
"(e) The Director of the Foundation, or any employee of the
Foundation designated by him, may for the purpose of carrying
out the provisions of such paragraph (9) hold such hearings and
sit and act at such times and places and take such testimony
as he shall deem advisable. The Director or any employee of the
Foundation designated by him may administer oaths or affirma-
tions to witnesses appearing before the Director or such employee.
"(f) (1) The Director of the Foundation may obtain by regula-
tion, subpena, or otherwise such information in the form of
testimony, books, records, or other writings, may require the
keeping of and furnishing such reports and records, and may
make such inspections of the books, records, and other writings
and premises or property of any person or persons as may be
deemed necessary or appropriate by him to carry out the provi-
sions of such paragraph (9), but this authority shall not be
exercised if adequate and authoritative data are available from
any Federal agency. In case of contumacy by, or refusal to obey
a subpena served upon, any person referred to in this subsection,
National
Science
Foundation.
Weather
modification.
Research.
64 Stat. 149.
42 USC 1862.
Reports.
64 Stat. 134.
42 USC
1S73-75.
Research
contracts.
Gifts.
42 USC 1S70.
Loan of
property, etc.
Hearings.
Documentary
evidence.
650
Violation
and penalty.
G2 Stat. 791.
Weather
modification
reporting.
85 STAT. 735
85 STAT. 736
Report
requirement.
the district court of the United States for any district in which
such person is found or resides or transacts business, upon appli-
cation by the Director, shall have jurisdiction to issue an order
requiring such person to appear and give testimony or to appear
and produce documents, or both ; and any failure to obey such
order of the court may be punished by such court as a contempt
thereof.
"(2) The production of a person's books, records, or other
documentary evidence shall not be required at any place other
than the place where such person usually keeps them, if, prior to
the return date specified in the regulations, subpena, or other
document issued with respect thereto, such person furnishes the
Foundation with a true copy of such books, records, or other
documentary evidence (certified by such person under oath to
be a true and correct copy) or enters into a stipulation with the
Director as to the information contained in such books, records,
or other documentary evidence. Witnesses shall be paid the same
fees and mileage that are paid witnesses in the courts of the
United States.
"(3) Any person who willfully performs any act prohibited or
willfully fails to perform any act required by the above provi-
sions of this subsection, or any regulation issued thereunder, shall
upon conviction be fined not more than $500.
"(4) Information contained in any statement, report, record, or
other document furnished pursuant to this subsection shall be
available for public inspection, except (A) information authorized
or required by statute to be withheld and (B) information
classified in accordance with law to protect the national security.
The foregoing sentence shall not be interpreted to authorize or
require the publication, divulging, or disclosure of any informa-
tion described in section 1905 of title 18 of the United States Code,
except that the Director may disclose information described in
such section 1905, furnished pursuant to this subsection, whenever
he determines that the withholding thereof would be contrary to
the purposes of this section and section 3(a) (9) of this Act."
Approved July 11, 1958.
Public Law 92-205— 92nd Congress, H.R. 6893
December 18, 1971
AX ACT To provide for the reporting of weather modification activities to
the Federal Government.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That, as used in
this Act—
(1) The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Commerce.
(2) The term "person" means any individual, corporation, com-
pany, association, firm, partnership, society, joint stock company,
any State or local government or any agency thereof, or any other
organization, whether commercial or nonprofit, who is perform-
ing weather modification activities, except where acting solely
as an employee, agent, or independent contractor of the Federal
Government.
(3) The term "weather modification" means any activity per-
formed with the intention of producing artificial changes in the
composition, behavior, or dynamics of the atmosphere.
(4) The term "United States" includes the several States, the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any
territory or insular possession of the United States.
Sec. 2. No person may engage, or attempt to engage, in any
weather modification activity in the United States unless he sub-
mits to the Secretary such reports with respect thereto, in such
form and containing such information, as the Secretary may by
651
rule prescribe. The Secretary may require that such reports be sub-
mitted to him before, during, aud after any such activity or
attempt.
Sec. 3. (a) The Secretary shall maintain a record of weather
modification activities, including attempts, which take place in the
United States and shall publish summaries thereof from time to
time as he determines.
(b) All reports, documents, and other information received by
the Secretary under the provisions of this Act shall be made avail-
able to the public to the fullest practicable extent.
(c) In carrying out the provisions of this section, the Secretary
shall not disclose any information referred to in section 1905 of
title 18, United States Code, and is otherwise unavailable to the
public, except that such information shall be disclosed —
(1) to other Federal Government departments, agencies,
and officials for official use upon request ;
(2) in any judicial proceeding under a court order formu-
lated to preserve the confidentiality of such information with-
out impairing the proceeding ; and
(3) to the public if necessary to protect their health and
safety.
Sec. 4. (a) The Secretary may obtain from any person whose ac-
tivities relate to weather modification by rule, subpena, or other-
wise such information in the form of testimony, books, records,
or other writings, may require the keeping and furnishing of such
reports and records, and may make such inspection of the books,
records, and other writings and premises and property of any per-
son as may be deemed necessary or appropriate by him to carry
out the provisions of this Act, but this authority shall not be exer-
cised to obtain any information with respect to which adequate
and authoritative data are available from any Federal agency.
(b) In case of contumacy by, or refusal to obey a subpena served
upon any person pursuant to this section, the district court of the
United States for any district in which such person is found or
resides or transacts business, upon application by the Attorney
General, shall have jurisdiction to issue an order requiring such
person to appear and give testimony or to appear and produce
documents, or both ; and any failure to obey such order of the
court may be punished by such court as a contempt thereof.
Sec. 5. Any person who knowingly and willfully violates section
2 of this Act, or any rule issued thereunder, shall upon conviction
thereof be fined not more than $10,000.
Sec 6. There are authorized to be appropriated $150,000 for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1972, and $200,000 each for the fiscal
years ending June 30, 1973, and June 30, 1974, to carry out the
provisions of this Act.
Approved December 18, 1971.
Records,
publication.
Confidential
information.
62 Stat. 791.
Authority of
Secretary.
Noncompliance.
Penalty.
Appropriation*
Public Law 93-436— 93rd Congress, S. 3320
October 5, 1974
AN ACT To extend the appropriation authorization for reporting of
weather modification activities.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 6
of the Act entitled "An Act to provide for the reporting of weather
modification activities to the Federal Government", approved De-
cember 18. 1971 (15 U.S.C. 330e), is amended by striking out "end-
ing June 30, 1973, and June 30, 1974," and inserting in lieu thereof
"1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, and 1977,".
Approved October 5, 1974.
88 Stat. 1212
Weather
modification
reporting.
Appropriation,
extension.
652
Oct. 13, 1076
[S. 3383]
National
Weather
Modification
Policy Act
of 1976.
1 5 USC 330
note.
15 I'SC 330
note.
Policy.
Research and
development
program.
15 DSC 330
note.
Public Law 94-490— 94th Congress
October 13, 1976
AN ACT To authorize and direct the Secretary of Commerce to develop a
national policy on weather modification, and tor other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act
may be cited as the "National Weather Modification Policy Act of
1976".
SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY.
(a) Findings. — The Congress finds and declares the following:
(1) Weather-related disasters and hazards, including
drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, hail, lightning, fog. floods, and
frost, result in substantial human suffering and loss of life,
billions of dollars of annual economic losses to owners of crops
and other property, and substantial financial loss to the
United States Treasury ;
(2) Weather modification technology has significant poten-
tial for preventing, diverting, moderating, or ameliorating the
adverse effects of such disasters and hazards and enhancing
crop production and the availability of water ;
(3) The interstate nature of climatic and related phenom-
ena, the severe economic hardships experienced as the result
of occasional drought and other adverse meteorological con-
ditions, and the existing role and responsibilities of the Fed-
eral Government with respect to disaster relief, require appro-
priate Federal action to prevent or alleviate such disasters
and hazards ; and
(4) Weather modification programs may have long-range
and unexpected effects on existing climatic patterns which
are not confined by national boundaries.
(b) Purpose. — It is therefore declared to be the purpose of the
Congress in this Act to develop a comprehensive and coordinated
national weather modification policy and a national program of
weather modification research and development —
(1) to determine the means by which deliberate weather
modification can be used at the present time to decrease the
adverse impact of weather on agriculture, economic growth,
and the general public welfare, and to determine the potential
for weather modification ;
(2) to conduct research into those scientific areas consid-
ered most likely to lead to practical techniques for drought
prevention, or alleviation and other forms of deliberate
weather modification :
(3) to develop practical methods and devices for weather
modification :
(4) to make weather modification research findings avail-
able to interested parties ;
(5) to assess the economic, social, environmental, and legal
impact of an operational weather modification program ;
(6) to develop both national and international mechanisms
designed to minimize conflicts which may arise with respect to
the peaceful uses of weather modification ; and
(7) to integrate the results of existing experience and
studies in weather modification activities into model codes
and agreements for regulation of domestic and international
weather modification activities.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Art :
(1) The term ''Secretary" means the Secretary of Commerce.
(2) The term "State" means any State of the United States, the
District of Columbia, or any Commonwealth, territory, or posses-
sion of the United States.
653
(3) The term "weather modification" means any activity per-
formed with the intention and expectation of producing changes
in precipitation, wind, fog, lightning, and other atmospheric
phenomena.
SEC. 4. STUDY.
The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive investigation and 15 use 330
study of the state of scientific knowledge concerning weather note,
modification, the present state of development of weather modifi-
cation technology, the problems impeding effective implementation
of weather modification technology, and other related matters.
Such study shall include —
,(1) a review and analysis of the present and past research
efforts to establish practical weather modification technology,
particularly as it relates to reducing loss of life and crop and
property destruction ;
(2) a review and analysis of research needs in weather
modification to establish areas in which more research could
be expected to yield the greatest return in terms of practical
weather modification technology ;
(3) a review and analysis of existing studies to establish
the probable economic importance to the United States in
terms of agricultural production, energy, and related economic
factors if the present weather modification technology were
to be effectively implemented ;
(4) an assessment of the legal, social, and ecological impli-
cations of expanded and effective research and operational
weather modification projects ;
(5) formulation of one or more options for a model regula-
tory code for domestic weather modification activities, such
code to be based on a review and analysis of experience and
studies in this area, and to be adaptable to State and national
needs ;
(6) recommendations concerning legislation desirable at
all levels of government to implement a national weather
modification policy and program ;
(7) a review of the international importance and implica-
tions of weather modification activities by the United States ;
(8) a review and analysis of present and past funding for
weather modification from all sources to determine the sources
and adequacy of funding in the light of the needs of the
Nation ;
(9) a review and analysis of the purpose, policy, methods,
and funding of the Federal departments and agencies involved
in weather modification and of the existing interagency coor-
dination of weather modification research efforts ;
(10) a review and analysis of the necessity and feasibility
of negotiating an international agreement concerning the
peaceful uses of weather modification ; and
(11) formulation of one or more options for a model inter-
national agreement concerning the peaceful uses of weather
modification and the regulation of national weather modifi-
cation activities ; and a review and analysis of the necessity
and feasibility of negotiating such an agreement.
SEC. 5. REPORT.
(a) In General. — The Secretary shall prepare and submit to
the President and the Congress, within 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, a final report on the findings, conclusions,
and recommendations of the study conducted pursuant to section
4. Such report shall include :
(1) a summary of the findings made with respect to each
of the areas of investigation specified in section 4 ;
(2) other findings which are pertinent to the determination
and implementation of a national policy on weather modifi-
cations ;
Submittal to
President and
Congress.
15 USC 330
note.
34-857 0 - 79 - 44
654
(3) a recommended national policy on weather modifica-
tion and a recommended national weather modification re-
search and development program which is consistent with,
and likely to contribute to, achieving the objectives of such
policy ;
(4) recommendations for levels of Federal funding suffi-
cient to support adequately a national weather modification
research and development program ;
(5) recommendations for any changes in the organization
and involvement of Federal departments and agencies in
weather modification which may be needed to implement ef-
fectively the recommended national policy on weather modi-
fication and the recommended research and development pro-
gram ; and
(6) recommendations for any regulatory and other legisla-
tion which may be required to implement such policy and pro-
gram or for any international agreement which may be ap-
propriate concerning the peaceful uses of weather modifica-
tion, including recommendations concerning the dissemina-
tion, refinement, and possible implementation of the model
domestic code and international agreement developed under
the specifications of section 4.
Cooperation. Each department, agency, and other instrumentality of the Fed-
eral Government is authorized and directed to furnish the Secre-
tary any information which the Secretary deems necessary to
carry out his functions under this Act.
(b) Operation and Consulation. — The Secretary shall solicit
and consider the views of State agencies, private firms, institu-
tions of higher learning, and other interested persons and govern-
mental entities in the conduct of the study required by section 4,
and in the preparation of the report required by subsection (a).
SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS.
15 use 330 (a) There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for
note- the purposes of carrying out the provisions of this Act not to ex-
ceed $1,000,000.
(b) Section 6 of the Act entitled "An Act to provide for tlw
reporting of weather modification activities to the Federal Gov-
ernment", approved December 18, 1971 (85 Stat. 736 ; 88 Stat.
1212; 15 U.S.C. 330e), is further amended by striking out "1973.
1974, 1975, 1976, and 1977," and inserting in lieu thereof "1073
through 1980,".
Approved Oct. 13, 1976.
655
0) O-Q 0"0
o 2; 3 o =
S o
'I £
o>
0) TO
O* co
s=.
as
-o.
oco ■
CO
So
_ o> E
c£ °
TO "
> a> to E-c
■S |2
: o a> > & to
c £ to I
£s«o§
1
5- ss
. o o o .—
-Cic-O-*^ .LTS-D
o am " "iw
m TO <-> _ "O „
5 o
O 03
o
E ,
o <=>
183
) j > aj _3 to
3 3- <u « S
c ro "-.5 a?
O 3
O W W y) 0) Q)
■a E
S E
TO g
2 a>
»u5
E g «'„,
*-es:5e e
llslil
: = cc 22 3
°. o To
o c y
So g.t:
E ».
<? a? Ej co-tp^o.
2 ±5 <"i5 X£ a> ~
c: ^> ■— to c_ a> —
oj a> > ox co-~.
= E a uju». ».2?
sI.e|
2 to^ S
= is 2 = <=
° 2 =.2
• 2 £ SIS
£ 2 E •-
CO M of—
o = -o
T3 ^ TO O
!w°o co 5
/■E15 £ US
3.E»s|g
» CO TO S 2> 5
: 5.5 S 5-£
III
O D-
E •- 5 " "
' 2 _Sj o E «
&o£ Q.O =,
E § £
:E E
Eq g
5
■ E 2 a>±=
! O TO
! 5..S I
01
: to^.s = o
I E-tS™ 2
IIS Bit: o> 5
. o> to o> >£
co co
CD CD
656
«j E «°
T3 ,>y= * a.
" 2 «:
% b | go s-S
" D03 0 O
SE2- E
— R !2 -E 0 = ro 2> "<=> ks
c o
_ g TO
a> J= — <u £- > ° "> _ ,£
H c a. 0,0 5 °- o «SS Ecvj ■•
— o i- h "s *
5
«2 o 5
S i° |5 «1 i I S^|.S s|-§ g ess g > -2 , e|.h|
s*g si - o S « sl~"|ija.i ifc§»l i*2 8f|s2i.§|£
: i ee»
E E o <u = <? <5 u *i -E 2 o - «
Q.Q.
CD
oo O
657
to > «-> • c oiwojis ^ "-p .'.ii;
~E-= 3 2-5-*- > £ £5- EE
S3 U 4^ X
= S I </>.^~ TOTS » C oj «o"fJ
o w i. o) w « ><x: <o 1 w 3 *5 s o
= o p»SiJa)2^Sa)*'k-'Ot CD
£ 15 °..2
a> E
5 &
._ o ,. g ai j u ~p Oc.E
P.-£
: o =
3 cn
J ^
a> op So
■e c
|-.llis
D. O O- « O T3 ■.
(5»oooE
E JE 3Z E
Q c O « U U
I^E£-5£
J 3d 8* E§
£ a> ■* -S «. "1
<_>'"•—««' J3to
a> „, fa* efa»
= S S-g .= z
» — q.°2 £ 5
• *JC 3.2
C = 2c®
.is 2
O O SO OJk. 15 0) ™
Q Q o O O 0> CL00 «
DV>Q.O <D QJ -Q
S<£S5.g
to .-5 > *-<x>
«^*E o « =ir>
c ojzf I*-
■o K _ a> =
2 S i ='JE.§
I § 2-°-°
_3
o So '
w c -J T3 (O (X
a) • Si <»
ro.-t; p E-<= o> .
E = E "J
oESS
Q. u oj <1>
„, c a>
.c.2"<=> c
E o £
CO 01- —
o m"
a. !S « o
.2 coo 5
3-2 gS|
iSsif
,w.S-E£^
"sis-
o> te •» *
— £ « Ch-I
WOO
O (D 0)
il
2i o
E - i
« v>
— <u ■
r
»r0
5 His
. re oj c
> o > oo 33 ,~
1 r»» 1— aj ro _.
^ CO
. o
S ^3
"'coco
<a « v>
OO-H
CO CO CO
co
2 co ^2-1
s
6 J
658
TO QJ TO
£ E 1.1 % * i
>= 58 « 5.E
oooooo
o o o o o o
o — o o :
T3 WD
ooooo
o'pifliooo _ .
oir>r~r~-ooro >o> gi-infl o
r O J . , u- -31 o — " t; t
W _ n r _ — -n <^T3 n
E
03 O
E 2£ «=
is -°
3T3
— ^ = 03
a> 3 c
J o
«2 Q-o S *J
03 03 O g
$ 0 0 0)
O «J-* >
Sill
a. >- _re • - s B i_ z «
TO O
-
<Q 03 03
2-=-o'o
\oE S
03 TO m —
03 O c
Nine-
s'0.2 E^S^™
03 03 • • 5
■S 2 „ c o-w o.E ®-a
o SS'-S « = «* Ez 5 ™_ -
a„ a) m c c " ° M,; u w PTr-. oe != c\j *
° O >- O i_
^ wr o3 .c 2 03 £-5; E > 03 03 o. re
S ^c^'Sf^o ° 2 03 «> E^ 22 g
e .£ o - -
jwzszui.: o E
£ E=>
- .2 03 £ re .rj
E »T5<75 o-a-K-i:
-E <
■E 5
! M
Q. <
< _
<
O
659
<u e £ £?
■ M_ E *
c-o oj S
Li||j
: — = 1— o
: o a) c ».
> — -O CD o
rS _ E a)
i ■ <d E
■ "a E x t
, d> a) a> o
>-a E Q
; a. c 2.1=
■ £ E GL C
.re o —
>-= j- o —
.2_= a> 2
« 2 2 = o
5. -a -S _2
« <u *
<5*- o o.2
> TO <J Z
■ ,/)T3 «
V, oj q>.C
2.215:2 &
5 S
E ^x.
a Ǥ
g go.
g O_so
°ir>.er
. . co"
E 2 — c
E w°-i
" nr ■
= S-*- a)
w fo c </>
» U— TO
3 r- ~° 2-
• I
I Q3
s^p it:
574 • e E w 52
S? M— -o _o c
" <2 o .£.£
— — re to -a
8l||.§i£
<£ = E ~=> •> "? • -
o o 8=?»3
o a> « =_ <-
"3- S O c o ™
- to 53 to •— , 5
-E3 o _J2 =±=
O c
._ .c a> a> o
»_ = o cn b, to
r- o; a> a> i_
o £ °_2 El
' >> TO O p
SSEgils
• o o
o «o
^.0 0 >N
TO *" CO • —
o" o 2 2
U0 *f OaO Q. 0J
0O O O >
os'g C "to
£ o.2 £
g^2&
nil a-
TO O • TO o
Q>*; •» >v^J=T3 >r 0> 0>
.c E .t; = oe-— c v^jz
to « «
= MM
oe TO TO
i.C <n-0H-"^:°TO C' • "D
!■£ g 5 £ 2 •
If 2tt^-g2b.£gJ
C §s 53 if .2 Q.0.2J.-0 2
2-^ 2-^ TO T3 0> 2 C Q)
^7§.^5:^TO>-gS5 2^ = rea|«
I MS-P.ia>S^Wa>0&Ea,«r
TOgiS^ £
3 c >_ ro
T y ^ ^ to'
Q.O > <=
*2 § £
ili
ii2~s^^:
..-nE3
TO««.^Sa'2^i'
^ to ^ v> a> <d
•s §51 S 2£i^o »
•— 1 1— i co uo r~
coco4-«i-^i-
o> o~> o~) o~i cn
J>| OO) LO
oo OO oo s
cr cc o: cc
C = = C =
a> o o a> o
lt> m to to to
2 oo er> a> tD en
TO "> O
c 2 Q.
a> o
2 2 25^2^2
So 22
>-~2 o ci
Appendix K
Membership and Charter of the U.S. Department of Commerce
Weather Modification Advisory Board
Weather Modification Advisory Board
Mr. Harlan Cleveland, Chairman, Director, Program in International Affairs.
Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, P.O. Box 2820, Rosedale Rd., Prince-
ton, N.J. 08540.
Dr. D. Ray Booker, President, Aeromet, Inc., P.O. Box FF, Norman, OK 73070.
Dr. Roscoe R. Braham, Jr., Director, Cloud Physics Laboratory, University of
Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637.
Mr. Stanley A. Changnon, Jr., Head, Atmospheric Science Section, Illinois State
Water Survey, Box 232, Champaign-Urbana, Illinois 61801.
Mr. Abram Chayes, Professor of Law, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Mass.
02138.
Dr. John P. Craven, Dean of Marine Programs, University of Hawaii, 2540
Maile Way, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822.
Dr. James A. Crutchfield, Jr., Professor of Economics. Department of Economics,
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98105.
Mr. Robert D. Elliott, President, North American Weather Consultants, Inc.,
Goleta, California 93017.
Dr. John W. Firor. Director, National Center for Atmospheric Research, P.O.
Box 1470, Boulder, Colorado 80302.
Dr. T. Keith Glennan, 11483 Waterview, Reston, VA 22070.
Mr. Thomas L. Kimball. Executive Vice President, National Wildlife Federa-
tion, 1412 16th Street, Washington, D.C. 20036.
Dr. Thomas F. Malone, Director, Holcomb Research Institute, Butler University,
Indianapolis, Indiana 46208.
Ms. Martha A. Mclnnis, President, Enviro South, Inc., 3815 Interstate Court,
Suite 202, Montgomery. Alabama 36109.
Mr. Herman Pollack, Research Professor, International Affairs, Room 714
Library, George Washington University, Washington, D.C. 20052.
Mr. Wallace N. Robinson, III, Chairman, Western Kansas Groundwater Manage-
ment District No. 1, Federal Building, Scott City, KA 67871.
Dr. Joanne Simpson, Professor of Environmental Sciences, Center for Ad-
vanced Studies. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22903.
Mr. S. Bryce Streibel, Fessenden, North Dakota 58438.
U.S. Department of Commerce — Charter of Weather Modification Advisory
Board
a. establishment
The Secretary of Commerce (the "Secretary"), having determined that it
is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed
on the Secretary by Public Law 94-490 (the "Act"), hereby establishes the
Weather Modification Advisory Board (the "Board") pursuant to the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C App. I ( Supp V, 1975) .
B. EXPLANATION OF TERMS
The terms used in this Charter shall have the meanings that are prescribed
in the Act.
C. OBJECTIVES AND DUTIES
1. The Board shall advise and make recommendations to the Secretary through
the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (the
"Administrator") on matters of a national policy, a national research and de-
velopment program, and other aspects of weather modification as outlined in
the Act.
(660)
661
2. The Board may draw upon the experience and expertise of its members
upon the public, and upon other bodies and individuals deemed necessary to
provide advice, consultation, evaluations, and recommendations to the Secre-
tary on the various weather modification matters relative to Sections 4 and 5 of
the Act, such as : a. The present state of scientific knowledge of weather modi-
fication, its development, and technology; b. The problems impeding effective
implementation of weather modification technology ; c. Research needs in
weather modification and the economic importance of weather modification;
d. An assessment of the legal, social, and ecological implications of weather modi-
fications ; e. Development of model domestic regulatory codes ; f . International
implications and model agreements; g. A comprehensive and coordinated na-
tional weather modification policy ; h. A national program of weather modifica-
tion research and development ; and i. Legislation and funding associated with
such policy and program. The Board shall submit its report to the Secretary not
less than 15 days prior to the date the Secretary is required to submit the
report to the President and the Congress.
3. The Board functions solely as an advisory body, and will comply fully
with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
D. MEMBERS AND CHAIRPERSON
1. The Board shall consist of not more than 25 members and not less than
7, appointed by the Secretary. The members shall possess expertise, experience,
or current interest in one or more weather modification factors or related aspects
such as : research, operations, agriculture, water resources, economics, law, gov-
ernment, business, social and environmental impact, and international relations.
Members shall be appointed for up to 2 years and will serve at the discretion
of the Secretary. Appointments to fill vacancies shall be for the remainder of
the unexpired term of the vacancy.
2. The Chairperson of the Board shall be a nonfederal member and shall be
appointed by the Secretary from among the membership.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
1. The Board shall report to the Secretary through the Administrator.
2. The Board shall have an Executive Secretary who shall be a full-time Fed-
eral officer or employee designated by the Administrator.
3. The Board generally shall meet quarterly and at such other times as may be
deemed necessary by the Administrator or the Executive Secretary.
4. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall provide clerical
and other necessary support.
5. The annual cost of operating the Board is estimated at $160,000. This in-
cludes 2 person-years of staff support.
6. The Board may establish, subject to the provisions of the Department of
Commerce Committee Management Handbook (II, I.E.), and the approval of the
Administrator, an Executive Committee and such subcommittees or working
groups of its members as may be necessary.
7. Members of the Board will be compensated as consultants for time spent
attending Board meetings during any month in which the Board meets for more
than one day. They will, upon request, be allowed travel expenses as authorized
by 5 U.S.C. 5703.
F. DURATION
The Board shall terminate 2 years after its establishment unless it is earlier
terminated or renewed by proper authority by appropriate action.
January 18, 1977. Joseph E. Kasputy
Assistant Secretary for Administration
Pursuant to subsection 9(c) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C.
App. 1, this charter was filed with the Assistant Secretary for Administration on
January 18, 1977. On the same date, copies were filed with the Committees listed
below, and a copy was furnished the Library of Congress.
Senate Committee on Commerce.
House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
January 24, 1977. Robert T. Jordan, Chief,
Information Management Division, Office of
Organization and Management Systems.
Appendix L
Rules and Regulations and Required Forms for Submitting In-
formation on Weather Modification Activities to the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, in Accordance with Requirements of Public Law
92-205
Chapter IX — National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Department of Commerce
subchapter a — general regulations
part 908 maintaining records and submitting reports on weather
modification activities
In a notice published in the Federal Register of February 24, 1976 (41 FR
3064), the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-
tion proposed to amend the rules on maintaining records and submitting reports
on weather modification activities (37 FR 22974 and 39 FR 1832) . Interested per-
sons were given until March 25, 1976 to submit written views, objections, recom-
mendations, or suggestions in connection with the proposed amendments. The
few comments received in response to the notice have been considered in detail,
and, as a result, some revisions have been made in these amendments.
The first revision covers § 908.3(d), the amendment that allows the Adminis-
trator to waive some requirements in the reporting of certain weather modifica-
tion attempts. This amendment has been clarified to provide specifically that all
weather modification activities are to be reported to NOAA, that the Administra-
tor may decide to waive some subsequent reporting requirements for certain ac-
tivities after initial notification, and that the basis for such decision will be the
general acceptability, from a technical or scientific viewpoint, of the apparatus
and techniques to be used.
The second revision concerns the period for filing interim and final reports.
Sections 908.5(a) and 908.6 now provide for such reports to be filed within 45
days, since some respondents stated that they would encounter difficulty in meet-
ing a 30 day requirement.
The final revision is in § 908.5(a), with respect to the effective closing date for
the interim report period. In reconsidering this amendment, NOAA has decided
to adopt January 1 as the closing date for the interim report in order to avoid
ambiguity and to prepare summary reports that more accurately reflect the
status of weather modification activities during a calendar year.
The original rules on maintaining records and submitting reports on weather
modification activities were published in the Federal Register (37 FR 22974).
These rules were subsequently amended (39 FR 1832). For completeness, the re-
visions mentioned above and the remainder of the amendments now being effected
are summarized as follows :
1. Section 908.1 (k) and (1) have been added to define sponsor and operator.
2. The last sentence in § 908.3 (c) has been restated.
3. Section 908.3 (d) and (e) have been added.
4. Section 908.4(a) has been revised.
5. Section 908.5(a) has been changed.
6. Section 908.5(b) (2) has been reworded.
7. Section 908.6 has been changed.
8. Section 908.6(c) has been changed.
9. Section 906.8(a) (1) (viii) has been reworded.
10. Section 908.8(a) (2) has been reworded.
The purpose of these rules is to provide for the reporting to the Administrator
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of
(662)
663
Commerce, of weather modification activities taking place within the United
States, pursuant to the requirements of Pub. Law 92-205 as amended. The Sec-
retary of Commerce (and by delegation the Administrator) is charged under the
above law with the responsibility to assemble and retain records of such weather
modification activities, to make these records publicly available to the fullest ex-
tent practicable, and to publish summaries thereof from time to time. The intent
of this program is that expertise in the field of weather modification will be in-
creased ; that scientists and other concerned persons will have access to in-
formation about past and ongoing efforts toward weather modification ; that con-
cerned persons can determine whether their activities will be necessary or dupli-
cative, can check both desirable and undesirable atmospheric changes against
records of weather modification, and can be alert to possible territorial over-
lappings of weather modification operations. In addition, this reporting program
provides information on the possibility of harm to persons, property, or the en-
vironment, or of interference with Federal research projects.
Appropriate Federal agencies also report their weather modification activities
to the Secretary of Commerce. This Federal reporting complements the reporting
of non-Federally sponsored projects and provides for a central source of informa-
tion on all weather modification activities in the United States.
The actions of the Department of Commerce under these rules are not intended
as, nor do they constitute, control or regulation of weather modification opera-
tions. Any notification that may be made to operators and State officials on the
basis of information received will be advisory only.
Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 15 U.S.C. 330-330e and 15
U.S.C. 313, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has
amended Title 15, Code of Federal Regulations by the addition of Part 908. These
rules are administered by the Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce, pursuant to the Secre-
tary's delegation of authority in section 3 subparagraph .Olt of U.S. Department
of Commerce Organization Order 25-5A. The current rules, including all amend-
ments, are republished below in their entirety.
Robert M. White,
Administrator.
June 4, 1976.
Part 908 reads as follows :
Sec.
908.1 Definitions.
905.2 Persons subject to reporting.
908.3 Activities subject to reporting.
908.4 Initial report.
908.5 Interim reports.
908.6 Final report.
908.7 Supplemental reports.
908.8 Maintenance of records.
908.9 Retention of records.
908.10 Penalties.
908.11 Maintenance of record of related activities.
908.12 Public disclosure of information.
908.13 Address of letters.
908.14 Business to be transacted in writing.
908.15 Times for taking action : expiration on Saturday, Sunday, or holiday.
908.16 Signature.
908.17 Suspension or waiver of rules.
908.18 Matters not specifically provided for in rules.
908.19 Publication of notice of proposed amendments.
908.20 Effective date.
908.21 Report form.
Authority : Pub. L. 92-305, 85 Stat. 735, December 18, 1971.
§ 908.1 Definitions
As used in this part, terms shall have the meaning ascribed in this section.
(a) Administrator. The Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmos-
pheric Administration.
(b) Person. Any individual, corporation, company, association, firm, partner-
ship, society, joint stock company, any State or local government or any agency
thereof, or any other organization, whether commercial or nonprofit, except
where acting solely as an employee, agent, or independent contractor of the
Federal Government.
(c) Weather modification activity. Any activity performed with the intention
of producing artificial changes in the composition, behavior, or dynamics of the
atmosphere.
664
(d) United States. The several States, the District of Columbia, the Common-
wealth of Puerto Rico, and any territory or insular possession of the United
States.
(e) Persons whose activities relate to weather modification. Persons engaged
in weather modification activities or engaged in the distribution or sale of
weather modification apparatus or materials known by them to be destined for
use in weather modification activities.
(f ) Project. A related series of weather modification activities having a com-
mon objective.
(g) Modification mission. One or more airborne weather modification activities
intended to affect the same target area, or one or more weather modification ac-
tivities carried out by items of ground-based weather modification apparatus
intended to affect the same target area. For purposes of these rules, activities that
extend beyond 1 calendar day shall constitute a separate mission for each day
that they continue.
(h) Target area. The ground area within which the effects of the weather
modification activity are expected to be found.
(i) Control area. A preselected, untreated ground area used for comparison
with a target area.
(j) Weather modification apparatus. Any apparatus used with the intention of
producing artificial changes in the composition, behavior, or dynamics of the
atmosphere. For example: Seeding generators, propane devices, flares, rockets,
artillery projectiles, jet engines, etc.
(k) Sponsor. The primary person for whom the weather modification activity
is performed.
(1) Operator. The person who is primarily responsible for carrying out the
weather modification activity.
§ 908.2 Persons subject to reporting
Any person engaged or intending to engage in any weather modification ac«
tivity in the United States shall be subject to the reporting provisions of this part.
§ 908.3 Activities subject to reporting
(a) The following, when conducted as weather modification activities, shall
be subject to reporting :
(1) Seeding or dispersing of any substance into clouds or fog, to alter drop
size distribution, produce ice crystals or coagulation of droplets, alter the
development of hail or lightning, or influence in any way the natural develop-
ment cycle of clouds or their environment ;
(2) Using fires or heat sources to influence convective circulation or to
evaporate fog.
(3) Modifying the solar radiation exchange of the earth or clouds, through
the release of gases, dusts, liquids, or aerosols into the atmosphere ;
(4) Modifying the characteristics of land or water surfaces by dusting or
treating with powders, liquid sprays, dyes, or other materials ;
(5) Releasing electrically charged or radioactive particles, or ions, into
the atmosphere;
(6) Applying shock waves, sonic energy sources, or other explosive or
acoustic sources to the atmosphere ;
(7) Using aircraft propeller downwash, jet wash, or other sources of
artificial wind generation ; or
(8) Using lasers or other sources of electromagnetic radiation.
(b) In addition to the activities listed above, other similar activities falling
within the definition of weather modification as set forth in § 908.1 are also
subject to reporting.
(c) The requirement for reporting shall not apply to activities of a purely local
nature that can reasonably be expected not to modify the weather outside of the
area of operation. This exception is presently restricted to the use of lightning
deflection or static discharge devices in aircraft, boats, or buildings, and to the
use of small heat sources, fans, fogging devices, aircraft downwash, or sprays to
prevent the occurrence of frost in tracts or fields planted with crops susceptible
to frost or freeze damage. Also expected from the requirement for reporting are
religious activities or other ceremonies, rites and rituals intended to modify the
weather.
(d) All activities noted in §§ 908.3(a) and (b) are subject to initial reporting.
However, after the Administrator has received initial notification of a planned
activity, he may waive some of the subsequent reporting requirements. This de-
665
cision to waive certain reporting requirements will be based on the general ac-
ceptability, from a technical or scientific viewpoint, of the apparatus and tech-
niques to be used.
(e) Other reporting exceptions may be made in the future by rule of the
Administrator.
§ 90S4 Initial report
(a) Any person intending to engage in any weather modification project or
activity in the United States shall provide a report of his intention, to be
received by the Administrator at least 10 days before the commencement of such
project or activity. This report shall contain at least the following :
(1) The designation, if any, used by the operator for the project or
activity ;
(2) The following dates for weather modification activities :
(i) The date the first actual weather modification activity is to be
undertaken ;
(ii) The date on which the final modification activity is expected to
occur ;
(3) The following information on persons involved with the project or
activity :
(i) The name, affiliation, and address of the sponsor ;
(ii) The name, affiliation, and address of the operator ;
(4) The purpose of the project or activity ;
(5) A map showing the approximate size and location of the target and
* control areas, and the location of each item of ground-based weather modifi-
cation apparatus, precipitation measuring device, and, for airborne opera-
tions, the airport ;
(6) A description of the weather modification apparatus, modification
agents, and the techniques to be empolyed ;
(7) The name and address of the responsible individual from whom log
books or other records of the project or activity may be obtained ;
(8) Answers to the following questions on project safeguards :
(i) Has an Environmental Impact Statement, Federal or State, been
filed : Yes No If Yes, please furnish a copy as applicable.
(ii) Have provisions been made to acquire the latest forecasts, ad-
visories, warnings, etc. of the National Weather Service, Forest Service,
or others when issued prior to and during operations? Yes No
If Yes, please specify on a separate sheet.
(ii) Have any safety procedures (operational constraints, provisions
for suspension of operations, monitoring methods, etc. ) and any environ-
mental guidelines (related to the possible effects of the operations) been
included in the operational plans? Yes No If Yes, please
furnish copies or a description of the specific procedures and guidelines ;
and
(9) Optional remarks, to include any additional items which the person
deems significant or of interest and such other information as the Admini-
strator may request the person to submit.
(b) If circumstances prevent the signing of a contract or agreement to per-
form, or receipt of an authorization to proceed with, a weather modification
activity at a date early enough to comply with paragraph (a) of this section, the
initial report shall be provided so as to be received by the Administrator within
10 days of the date of signing of the contract or agreement, or receipt of authori-
zation to proceed. In such cases, the report shall be accompanied by an explana-
tion as to why it was not submitted at least 10 days prior to the commencement
of the activity.
(c) In the event that circumstances beyond the control of the person liable to
report under these regulations prevent the submission of the initial report in a
timely manner as described above, the report shall be forwarded as early as
possible, accompanied by an explanation as to why a timely report has not been
provided. If such explanation is deemed adequate, the Administrator will con-
sider the report as timely filed.
§ 908.5 Interim reports
(a) Any person engaged in a weather modification project or activity in the
United States on January 1 in any year shall submit to the Administrator, not
later than 45 days thereafter, an interim report setting forth as of such date the
information required below with respect to any such continuing project or ac-
666
tivity not previously furnished to the Administrator in a prior interim report;
provided that the January 1 date shall not apply if other arrangements have
previously been made with the written approval of the Administrator.
(b) The interim report shall include the file number assigned by the Admini-
strator and shall provide a summary of the project or activity containing at least
the following information for each month :
(1) Number of days on which actual modification activities took place;
(2) Number of days on which weather modification activities were con-
ducted, segregated by each of the major purposes of the activities ;
(3) Number of modification missions that were carried out ;
(4) Total number of hours of operation of each type of weather modifica-
tion apparatus (i.e., net hours of agent release) ;
(5) Total amount of agent used. If more than one agent was used, each
should be totaled separately (e.g., carbon dioxide, sodium chloride, urea,
silver iodide).
(c) The totals for the items in paragraph (b) of this section shall be provided
for the period covered by the interim report.
§908.6 Final report
Upon completion of a weather modification project or activity the person who
performed the same shall submit a report to the Administrator not later than 45
days after completion of the project or activity. The report shall include the file
number assigned by the Administrator and the following items :
(a) Information required for the interim reports (to the extent not previously
reported ) .
(b) The total number of days on which actual modification activities took
place during the project or activity.
(c) The total number of days during the project or activity on which weather
modification activities were conducted, segregated by each of the major purposes
of the activities.
(d) The total number of modification missions that were carried out under the
project or activity.
(e) The total number of hours of operation of each type of weather modification
apparatus during the project or activity (i.e., net hours of agent release).
(f) The total amount of modification agent (s) dispensed during the project or
activity. If more than one agent was used, each should be be totaled separately
(e.g., carbon dioxide, sodium chloride, urea, silver iodide).
(g) The date on which the final weather modification activity occurred.
§ 908.7 Supplemental reports
Notwithstanding other regulations, a supplemental report in letter form re-
ferring to the appropriate NOAA file number, if assigned, must be made to the
Administrator immediately if any report of weather modification activities sub-
mitted under § 908.4, § 908.5, or § 908.6 is found to contain any material inac-
curacies, misstatements, and omissions. A supplemental report must also be made
if there are changes in plans for the project or activity.
§ 908.8 Maintenance of records
(a) Any person engaging in a weather modification activity in the United
States shall maintain a record of such activity. This record shall contain at least
the following, when applicable :
(1) A chronological record of activities carried on, preferably in the form
of a daily log, which shall include the NOAA file number assigned to the pro-
ject, the designation of each unit of weather modification apparatus, and at
least the following information for each unit :
(i ) Date of the weather modification activity.
(ii) Position of each aircraft or location of each item of weather modi-
fication apparatus during each modification mission. Maps may be used.
(iii) Time when weather modification activity began and ended.
(iv) Total duration of operation of each unit of weather modification
apparatus (i.e., net hours of agent release).
( v ) Type of each modification agent used.
(vi) Rate of dispersal of each agent during the period of actual opera-
tion of weather modification apparatus.
(vii) Total amount of agent used. If more than one agent was used,
report total for each type separately.
(viii) Number of days on which weather modification activities were
conducted, segregated by each of the major purposes of the activities.
667
(2) The monthly totals of hours of modification activity, the amount of
modification agent used, and the number of days on which weather modifica-
tion activities were conducted, segregated by each of the major purposes of
the activities, shall be shown on the daily log sheet for the last day of each
month.
(b) When the activity involves ground-based weather modification apparatus,
records of the following shall also be maintained, when applicable, but need not
be made part of the daily log :
(1) The location of each item of weather modification apparatus in use
and its identification such as type and manufacturer's model number. If the
apparatus is not commercially available, a brief description of the apparatus
and the method of operation should be recorded.
(2) The name and address of the person responsible for operating each
weather modification apparatus.
(3) The altitude and type of weather phenomenon subjected to weather
modification activity during each operational period (e.g., cumulus clouds
between 10,000 and 30,000 feet m.s.l. ; ground fog) .
(c) When the activity involves airborne weather modification apparatus, rec-
ords of the following shall also be maintained, when applicable, but need not be
made a part of the daily log : For each airborne weather modification apparatus
run : altitude, air speed ; release points of modification agents, method of modifi-
cation and characteristics of flares, rockets, or other delivery systems employed ;
temperature at release altitude ; and, for aircraft : the type of aircraft, its identi-
fication number, the airport or airports used, and the names and addresses of crew
members and the person responsible for operating the weather modification ap-
paratus ; and the altitude and type of weather phenomenon subjected to weather
modification activity during each operational period (e.g., cumulus clouds between
10,000 and 30,000 feet m.s.l. ; ground fog) .
(d) The following records shall also be maintained, whenever applicable, but
need not be made a part of the daily log. Only data specifically collected for the
reported activity need be retained ; data available from other sources need not
be included.
(1) Any descriptions that were recorded of meteorological conditions in
. ' target and control areas during the periods of operation ; for example : per-
cent of cloud cover, temperature, humidity, the presence of lightning, hail,
funnel clouds, heavy rain or snow, and unusual radar patterns.
(2) All measurements made of precipitation in target and control areas.
(3) Any unusual results.
§ 908.9 Retention of records
Records required under § 908.8 shall be retained and available for inspection by
the Administrator or his designated representatives for 5 years after completion
of the activity to which they relate. Such records shall be required to be produced
for inspection only at the place where normally kept. The Administrator shall
have the right to make copies of such records, if he deems necessary.
§ 908.10 Penalties
Knowing and willful violation of any rule adopted under the authority of sec-
tion 2 of Pub. L. 92-205 shall subject the person violating such rule to a fine of not
more than $10,000, upon conviction thereof.
§ 908.11 Maintenance of records of related, activities
(a) Persons whose activities relate to weather modification activities, other
than persons engaged in weather modification activities, shall maintain records
concerning the identities of purchasers or users of weather modification apparatus
or materials, the quantities or numbers of items purchased, and the times of such
purchases. Such information shall be retained for at least 5 years.
(b) In addition, persons whose activities relate to weather modification shall
be required, under the authority of section 4 of Pub. L. 92-205, to provide the
Administrator, on his request, with information he deems necessary to carry out
the purposes of this act.
§ 908.12 Public disclosure of information
(a) Any records or other information obtained by the Administrator under
these rules or otherwise under the authority of Pub. L. 92-205 shall be made pub-
licly available to the fullest practicable extent. Such records or information may
668
be inspected on written request to the Administrator. However, the Administrator
will not disclose any information referred to in section 1905 of title 18, United
States Code, and that is otherwise unavailable to the public, except that such in-
formation shall be disclosed —
(1) To other Federal Government departments, agencies, and officials for
official use upon request ;
(2) In any judicial proceeding under a court order formulated to preserve
the confidentiality of such information without impairing the proceeding ; and
(3) To the public, if necessary to protect their health and safety.
(b) Certified copies of such reports and information, to the extent publicly
disclosable, may be obtained from the Administrator at cost in accordance with
the Department of Commerce implementation of the Freedom of Information Act.
(c) Persons reporting on weather modification projects or related activities
shall specifically identify all information that they consider not to be subject to
public disclosure under the terms of Pub. L. 92-205 and provide reasons in support
thereof. A determination as to whether or not reported information is subject to
public dissemination shall be made by the Administrator.
(d) When consideration of a weather modification activity report and related
information indicates that a proposed project may significantly depart from the
practices or procedures generally employed in similar circumstances to avoid
danger to persons, property, or the environment, or indicates that success of Fed-
eral research projects may be adversely affected if tlie proposed project is carried
out as described, the Administrator will notify the opera tor (s) and State officials
of such possibility and make recommendations where appropriate. The purpose of
such notification shall be to inform those notified of existing practices and pro-
cedures or Federal research projects known to NOAA. Notification or recom-
mendation, or failure to notify or recommend, shall not be construed as approval
or disapproval of a proposed project or as an indication that, if carried out as
proposed or recommended it may, in any way, protest or endanger persons, prop-
erty, or the environment or affect the success of any Federal research project,
Any advisory notification issued by the Adminsitrator shall be available to the
public and be included in the pertinent activity report file.
§ 908.13 Address of letters
Letters and other communications intended for the Administrator, in connection
with weather modification reporting or activities, shall be addressed to: The
Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental
Modification Office, Rockville, Md. 20852.
§ 908.14 Business to oe transacted in writing
All business transacted with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-
tration with regard to reports of weather modification activities should be trans-
acted in writing. Actions of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
will be based exclusively on the written record.
% 908.15 Times for talcing action; expiration on Saturday, Sunday, or holiday
Whenever periods of time are specified in these rules in days, calendar days are
intended. When the day, or the last day, fixed under these rules for taking any
action falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or on a Federal holiday, the action may be
taken on the next succeeding day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal
holiday.
§ 908.16 Signature
All reports filed with the National Oceanic and Atmospreric Administration
must be dated and signed by or on behalf of the person conducting or intending to
conduct the weather modification activities referred to therein by such person,
individually or, in the case of a person other than an individual, by a partner,
officer, or other person having corresponding functions and authority. For this
purpose "officer" means a president, vice president, treasurer, secretary, or comp-
troller. Notwithstanding the foreging, such reports may also be signed by the duly
authorized agent or attorney of the person whose activities are being reported.
Proof of such authorization shall be furnished to the Administrator when filing a
report, unless previously furnished.
§ 908.11 Suspension or waiver of rules
In an extraordinary situation, any requirement of these rules may be suspended
or waived by the Administrator on request of the interested party, to the extent
such waiver is consistent with the provisions of Pub. L. 92-205 and subject to such
other requirements as may be imposed.
669
§ 908.18 Matters not specifically provided for in rules
All matters not specifically provided for or situations not specifically addressed
in these rules will be decided in accordance with the merits of each case by or
under the authority of the Administrator, and such decision will be communicated
in writing to all parties involved in the case.
§ 908.19 Publication of notice of proposed amendments
Whenever required by law, and in other cases whenever practicable, notice of
proposed amendments to these rules will be published in the Federal Register.
If not published with the notice, copies of the text of proposed amendments will
be furnished to any person requesting the same. All comments, suggestions, and
briefs received within the time specified in the notice will be considered before
adoption of the proposed amendments, which may be modified in the light thereof.
Informal hearings may be held at the discretion of the Administrator.
% 908.20 Effective date
These rules are effective on June 10, 1976.
§ 908.21 Report form
Pub. L. 92-205 and these rules should be studied carefully prior to reporting.
Reports required by these rules shall be submitted on forms obtainable on
request from the Administrator, or on an equivalent format. In special situations,
such alterations to the forms as the circumstances thereto may render neces-
sary may be made, provided they do not depart from the requirements of these
rules or of Pub. L. 92-205.
[FR Doc. 76-16807 Filed 6-9-76 ;8 :45 am]
34-857 O - 79 - 45
670
Attachment
CaapMi *> acattma vtth witwrtiwi « rmrat mt farari cm
Form Appro vtxf 0MB No. 41-2664 E^res 12-2) -77
TO: Environmental Modification Office (EM-5)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Rockville. Maryland 20852
NOAA FORM 17-4 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
(S-761 N AT' L OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADM.
■ntivtat armkBT nil wr ituf ■ UAnieiniviay
INITIAL REPORT ON WEATHER MODIFICATION
ACTIVITIES (P.L. 205, 92NO. CONGRESS)
1. PROJECT OR ACTIVITY DESIGNATION, IF ANY
2. DATES OF PROJECT
a. DATE FIRST ACTUAL WEATHER
MODIFICATION ACTIVITY IS TO
BE UNDERTAKEN
X PURPOSE OP PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
». EXPECTED TERMINATION
DATE OF WEATHER
MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES
4.I.! SPONSOR
4.1b) OPERATOR
NAME
NAME
AFFILIATION
PHONE NUMBER
AFFILIATION
PHONE NUMBER
STREET ADDRESS
STREET ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP CODE
CITY
STATE
ZIP CODE
S. TARGET AND CONTROL AREAS (See 7n. miction.;
TARGET AREA
CONTROL AREA
LOCATION
SIZE OF AREA
•O. Ml.
LOCATION
SIZE OF AREA
SO. Mt.
4. DESCRIPTION OP WEATNER M.ODIPICATION APPARATUS. MODIFICATION AGENTS AND TNEIR DISPERSAL RATES, THE TECHNIQUES
EMPLOYED, ETC. rs— tnetmcttehe)
7. LOO ROCCS
Enter name, affiliation, address, and telephone number of
reaponaible individual from whom log books or other records
may be obtained.
NAME
AFFILIATION
PHONE NUMBER
STREET AODRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP CODE
a. SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
□ Yes □ NO Haa an Environmental Impact Statement, Federal or State been filed? If yes, please furnish a copy as
applicable.
□ YCf Q NO Have proriaions been made to acquire the latest forecasts, advisories, warnings, etc. of the National
Weather Service, Forest Service, or others when issued prior to and during operations? If yes, please
specify oo a separate sheet.
□ YES £3 NO Have any aafety procedures (operational constraints, provisions /or mumpmmion of operations, monitoring
method*, ate.) and any environmental guidelines {related to the possible effects of the operations)
been included in the operational plans? If yes, pleaae furnish copies or a description of the specific
procedures and guidelines.
V. OPTIONAL REMARKS (See M< miction.. Urn* Separate Sheet.)
NAME
rfiTiPirniny 1 certify that the above statements are true, complete
CERTIFICATION! and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
AFFILIATION
SIGNATURE
STRICT ADDRESS
OFFICIAL TITLE
CITY
STATE
ZIP CODE
DATE
PHONE NUMBER
Instructions for Initial Report on Weather Modification Activities
"This report is required by Public Law 92-205; 85 Stat 735; 15 TJ.S.C. 3301).
Knowing and willful violation of any rule adopted under the authority of Section
2 of Public Law 92-205 shall subject the person violating such to a fine or not
more than $10,000, upon conviction thereof."
One completed copy of this form is to be received 10 days1 or more prior to
actual modification activities. A NOAA file number will be assigned by tbc
Administrator after receipt of the initial report for each project or activity.
1 For exceptions, see Sections 908.4(b) and (c), Part 908 of Title 15, Code of Federal
Regulations.
671
A supplemental report in a letter form referring to the appropriate NOAA file
number must be made to the Administrator if the "Initial Report" is found to
contain any material inaccuracies, misstatements, and omissions, or if there are
changes in plans for the project or activity.
Item 1. Enter designation, if any, used by operator for the project or activity.
Item 2. Enter :
(a) Date first actual weather modification activity is to be undertaken;
(b) Date on which final weather modification activity is expected to occur.
Item 3. Enter the purpose of the project or activity : e.g., rainfall increase,
hail suppression, cold fog dispersal, etc.
Item 4. Enter :
(a) Name, phone number, affiliation, and address of the primary person
for whom the project is to be performed ( sponsor ) .
(b) Name, phone number, affiliation, and address of the person primarily
responsible for carrying out the project (operator) .
Item 5. A map should be attached showing size and location of target area,
control area, coded number and location of each item of ground-based weather
modification apparatus and coded number and location of key raingages, radars,
or other precipitation measuring devices. Also show location of airport for air-
borne operations.
Item 6. Describe the weather modification apparatus, modification agents, and
the techniques to be used. This would include type of ground or airborne appara-
tus to be used, type of modification material to be dispensed, rate of dispensing
material in grams per hour or other appropriate units, type of precipitation gages
to be used in target and control areas, and any other pertinent information such
as type of radars, type of aircraft to be used, techniques to be employed, (e.g.,
cloud base seeding at 10,000 feet msl).
Item 7. List name, phone number, affiliation, and address of the responsible
individual from whom log books or other records may be obtained.
Item 8. Provide applicable answers to questions as indicated.
Item 9. This item is to permit the reporting person to include any information
not covered by items 1 through 8 but which he feels is significant or of interest.
It is also to be used to include any information not covered elsewhere that the
Administrator may request.
672
Attachment
FORM APPROVED O.M.B. NO. 4J-R2664
APPROVAL EXPIRES >2-3?-77
NOAA FORM 17 -4 A
U. S. DEPARTMENT Of COMMERCE
IONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
INTERIM ACTIVITY REPORTS AND FINAL REPORT
"This report is required by Public Law 92- 205/85 Sfof 735; ?5 U.S.C. 3306.
Knowing and willful violation of any rule adopted under the authority of sec-
tion 2 of Public Law 92—205 snail subject the person violating sued rule to
a fin* of not more than $10,000, upon conviction thereof."
NOAA FILE NUMBEf
I i INTERIM REPORT
I I FINAL REPORT
Complete in accordance with instructions on reverse «nd forward one copy:
TO: Environmental Modification Office (EM-5)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Rocltville, Maryland 20852
(a)
NUMBER
Of
MODIFICATION
DAYS
NUMBER OF MODIFICATION
DAYS PER MAJOR PURPOSE
NUMBER
OF MODI-
FICATION
MISSIONS
NOURS OF
APPARATUS
OPERATION
BY TYPE
REPORTING PERIOD
TYPE AND AMOUNT
OF AGENT USED
FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
TOTAL
TOTALS
FOR
FINAL
REPORT
DATE ON WHICH FINAL WEATHER MODIFICATIOM ACTIVITY OCCURRED (For Fins I Report Only)
NAME OF REPORTING PERSON
CERTIFI- j cemfv ,),., .n statements in this repon on this weather modification proieci are
CA1ION: complete and correct to ihe best of my knowledge and are made in good faith
AFFILIATION
SIGNATURE
STREET ADDRESS
OFFICIAL TITLE
CITY
STATE
ZIP CODE
DATE
NOl« FORM 17-4* 61
Instructions for Interim and Final Reports
Any person engaged in any weather modification project or activity in the
United States on January 1 in any year shall submit one copy of this form setting
forth as of such date the information required with respect to each such con-
tinuing project or activity not previously furnished in a prior interim report.
The box indicating "Interim Report" should be checked. The January 1 date
nhall not apply if other arrangements have previously been made with the writ-
ten approval of the Administrator of NOAA. The report shall be received by
NOAA not later than 45 days following the end of the reported period.
Upon completion of a project or activity one copy of this report shall be sub-
mit ted and the box checked indicating "Final Report." The final report shall be
673
received by NOAA not later than 45 days after the completion of the project or
activity.
The NOAA File Number should be filled in for any project for which the
Administrator has assigned a file number.
A supplemental report in letter form referring to the appropriate NOAA file
number must be made to the Administrator if the "Interim" or "Final" reports
are found to contain any material inaccuracies, misstatements, and omissions.
INTERIM REPORT
The information in Items (a) through (e) on the report form should be pro-
vided as prescribed below for the months to which the report pertains. If no
data are applicable for any given item in any month, enter zero.
Item (a) : Enter number of days on which actual weather modification
activities took place.
Item (b) : Enter in the appropriate column number of days on which modifica-
tion activities were conducted, segregated by each of the major purposes of the
activities. Normally, the total of entries in (b) would equal total in (a).
Item (c) : Enter number of modification missions that were carried out.
Item (d) : Enter in the appropriate column total number of hours of operation
of each type of weather modification apparatus, (i.e., net hours of agent release).
If the form does not contain sufficient space, report additional types on a sepa-
rate sheet.
Item (e) : Enter in the appropriate column total amount of agent used, by
type. If the form does not contain sufficient space, report additional types on a
separate sheet.
The totals for these items shall be provided for the period covered by the
interim report.
FINAL REPORT
The final report shall contain the information required for interim reports, to
the extent not previously reported. In addition, the items designated as "Totals
for Final Report" should be reported. This information should pertain to the
entire project or activity period, rather than only the period since the last interim
report. At the space at the end of the form, enter the date on which final
weather modification activity occurred.
674
MONTH AND YEAR NOAA FILE MUMMER
DESIGNATION OF APPARATUS
■
0
«
X
111
a
O
b.
O
I
z
D INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE BEFORE ENTERING DATA ON FORM
>
U
<
0
Mj
■t
3
ft,
s
*
K
u
z
0
<
>
m
j
s
I
:
INCREASE
*
0
z
i
K
MODIFICATION AGENT
Z
0"
I
<
Ul
NOAA FORM I7-4B U. S. DEPARTMENT OP COMMERCE
l6_76, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
DAILY LOG DURING WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES
This report is required by Public Law 92-205; 85 Stat 735; 15 U.S.C. 330b. Knowing and
willful violation of any rule adopted under the authority of section 2 of Public Law 92-205 shall
subject the person violating such rule to a fine of not more than $10,000, upon conviction thereof.
LOCAL TIME
o"
0.
0,
K
<n
CAREFULLY RE/
POSITION OR LOCATION
MONTHLY TOTAL
<
a
Instructions for Completing Daily Log Form
daily log of activities
This is a suggested form to be used in recording the information required to
be kept by Section 908.8, Part 908 of Title 15, Code of Federal Regulations.
Other logs may be used, providing they contain the information required. A
tabular form is provided on which to report a daily log of activities for each
unit of weather modification apparatus. The form is suitable for recording opera-
tion of individual items of ground or airborne apparatus. In the spaces provided
above the columns, write the designation of the wreather modification apparatus,
coded to refer to the description required by Sections 908.8(b) (1) and 908.8(c).
675
Part 908 of Title 15, Code of Federal Regulations, the month and year of daily
record, the name of the operator, and the NOAA file number. These or other logs
containing the required information shall be retained for 5 years ; they are not
to be sent to NOAA.
Explanation of columns follows :
Column (1) : State date of the weather modification activity.
Column (2) : Give each aircraft position or location of each item of weather
modification apparatus during each modification mission. Maps may be used.
Columns (3 and (4) : State local time when modification activity began and
ended. Use 24-hour clock time (e.g., 0100 signifies 1 :00 a.m. and 2300 signifies
11 :00 p.m.). For intermittent operations, the start and end of the total sequences
are acceptable.
Column (5) : Give duration of operation of each unit of weather modification
apparatus, in hours and minutes. (Col. 5-Col. 4-Col. 3).
Column (6) : Describe type of modification agent used.
Column (7) : Give rate of dispersal of agent during the period of actual opera-
tion of weather modification apparatus, by hour or other appropriate time period.
Column (8) : Give total amount of modification agent used. If more than one
agent was used, report total for each type separately.
Columns (9), (10), (11), (12) and (13) : Check once for each day on which
modification activities were conducted, segregated by each of the major purposes
of the activities.
On the daily log sheet for the last day of each month, give monthly totals, for
Columns (5), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), and (13).
Appendix M
Selected State Kules and Regulations for the Administration
or State Weather Modification Statutes
Illinois
State of Illinois Rules and Regulations for the Administration and
Enforcement of the Provisions of the Weather Modification Control Act
department of registration and education
(Ronald E. Stackler, Director, Springfield)
[Printed by Authority of the State of Illinois]
Foreword
These Rules are issued under the authority of Sections 6, 11, 12, 17, 20 and 26,
Chapter 146%, Illinois Revised Statutes, 1973, S The Weather Modification Con-
trol Act.
RULE 1 CONCEPT OF RULES
1. Purpose of Rules. — These Rules are adopted to promote properly conducted
weather modification operations and research and development, to minimize pos-
sible adverse effects from weather modification activities and to facilitate the
administration and enforcement of the Weather Modification Control Act. These
Rules shall be liberally construed to carry out these objectives and purposes.
2. Use and Effect of Rules. — These Rules are prescribed for the performance of
the statutory powers and functions vested in the Department of Registration and
Education. In no event shall any Rule or Rules be construed as a limitation or
restriction upon the exercise of any statutory power of the Department.
3. Suspension or Modification of Rules. — These Rules may be suspended or
modified by the Director of the Department of Registration and Education, in
whole or in part, in the interest of justice. The Department of Registration and
Education by and through the Director reserves the right to waive compliance
with any of these Rules whenever in the Director's judgment, no party will be
injured thereby.
4. Construction of Rules. — These Rules should not be construed to abrogate,
modify or limit any rights, privileges, or immunities granted or protected by the
Constitution or laws of the United States or the Constitution or laws of the State
of Illinois nor to deny any person life, liberty, or property without due process of
law.
RULE 2 — DEFINITIONS
As used in these Rules, unless the context otherwise requires, the terms specified
herein have the meanings ascribed to them herein or by the Weather Modification
Control Act, whichever shall be applicable, as same may be, at any time or from
time to time, amended.
1. Act or Weather Modification Control Act. — "Act" or "Weather Modification
Control Act" means "An Act to regulate weather modification in this State and
amending certain Acts therein named in connection therewith" (P.A. 78-674,
effective October 1, 1973), as same may at any time or from time to time, be
amended.
2. Weather Modification Apparatus. — "Weather Modification Apparatus" means
any apparatus used with the intention of producing artificial changes in the com-
position, motions and resulting behavior of the atmosphere.
:>,. Sponsor. — "Sponsor" means any person who enters into an agreement with a
permittee to perform an operation.
4. Target Area.— "Target Area" means the surface area within which the effects
of an operation are expected to be found.
(676)
677
5. Operations Area. — "Operations Area" means the area in which an operation
is conducted to produce or attempt to produce the desired effect within the target
area.
6. Control Area. — "Control Area" means a preselected, untreated surface area
in which no effects are expected and which is used for comparison with a target
area.
7. Professional Level. — "Professional Level" means a level of responsibility for
direct supervision and conduct of operations or substantial parts thereof.
8. Department's Address.— 628 East Adams Street, Springfield, Illinois 62786,
or such other address as shall at any time or from time to time, be designated by
the Director or his duly designated representative.
RULE 3 ADMINISTRATION
1. Director. — The powers and duties of the Department enumerated in the
Illinois Civil Administrative Code, where applicable, the Act and these Rules
shall be exercised by the Director.
2. Board. — Reports from the Board, except in emergencies, shall be in writing.
The Chairman of the Board shall be responsible for forwarding to the Director
reports from the Board promptly and for keeping other members of the Board
advised of pending business of the Board. The Director shall act promptly upon
receipt of reports from the Board.
RULE 4 — HEARINGS
1. Hearings Required. — Except for emergency modifications of operational per-
mits as provided for in Section 21(b) of the Act, before suspending, revoking,
refusing to renew or modifying a license or a permit, the Department shall con-
duct a hearing in conformity with Section 8 of the Act.
2. Stenographic Record. — The stenographic record of a hearing shall be re-
tained for at least five years. It need not be transcribed unless there is judicial
review of the final administrative decision under Section 25 of the Act.
RULE 5 — LICENSE AND PERMIT REQUIRED
1. Requirement. — Except as provided in Subsection 2 of this Rule, no person
may engage in weather modification activities :
(a) Without both a professional weather modification license issued under
Rule 6 and a weather modification operational permit issued under Rule 7 ;
or
(b) In violation of any term, condition or limitation of such license or
permit.
2. Exemptions. — The following activities are exempted from the license and
permit requirements of the Act :
(a) Research and development conducted by the State, its subdivisions
and agencies of the State and of its subdivisions, institutions of higher learn-
ing and bona fide research organizations ;
(b) Activities for protection against fire, frost or fog ; and
(c) Activities normally conducted for purposes other than inducing, in-
creasing, decreasing or preventing hail, precipitation, clouds or tornadoes.
3. Conduct of Exempt Activities. — Exempted activities shall be so conducted
as not to interfere with weather modification operations conducted under a
permit issued in accordance with the Act and these Rules.
4. Notice of Exempt Activities. — Persons conducting exempted operations
and research and development shall file with the Department the original
of^a notice form available from the Department and with the Chairman of the
Board at the Department's address a copy of the form indicating their intent to
engage in such activities. Information from notice forms will be used in ascer-
taining the extent to which records should be kept for exempted activities under
Rule 8(6) and reports should be filed on such activities under Rule 9(5). Notice
forms will require the following data :
( a ) Name and address of the person giving notice ;
(b) Name and address of the sponsor (if any) of the operation or research
and development ;
( c ) Whether the activity is operational or research and development ;
(d) Nature and object to the activity ;
678
(e) The legal description of and a map showing the operations area, tar-
get area and control area, if the activity involves any such areas ;
(f) The approximate starting date of the activity and its anticipated
duration ;
(g) The kind of weather modification agent (s) intended for use; and
(h) The kinds of weather modification apparatus which will be used.
RULE 6 — LICENSES
1. Criteria for Issuance : Issuance of licenses shall be based on the applicant's
character, knowledge of weather modification principles and techniques and ex-
perience in their application. The following shall be the minimum educational
and experience criteria :
(a) A minimum of two years' field experience at the professional level in
weather modification field operations or research ; and
(b) One of the following three requirements :
(1) Six additional years' experience in weather modification field opera-
tions or research ; or
(1) Six additional years' experience in weather modification field
operations or research ; or
(2) A degree in engineering, mathematics, or the physical sciences
plus two additional years' experience in weather modification field op-
erations or research ; or
(3) A degree in meteorology, or a degree in engineering, mathematics,
or the physical sciences which includes or is in addition to at least
twenty-five semester hours of meteorological course work.
2. Application for License. — An applicant for a license shall fill out and file
with the Department the original of an application form available from the De-
partment and a copy thereof with the Chairman of the Board at the Depart-
ment's address no later than thirty days before the applicant plans to use the
license. The form shall require relevant information about the applicant's char-
acter, knowledge of weather modification principles and experience in their ap-
plication. Among the data required is information about the applicant's :
(a) Educational background at the college and graduate level. This in-
cludes the dates of attendance and of graduation, the major and minor
subjects (including the number of semester hours of meteorological course
work), the degrees received, and the titles of any thesis and/or dissertation.
(b) Experience in weather modification or related activities. Attention
should be given to experience with reference to meteorological conditions
typical of Illinois. The applicant should list the dates of each position held,
the title of the position (indicate whether it was of sub-professional or
professional level), the name and address of the employer, a description
of the work done (indicate both the magnitude and complexity of the work
and the duties and degree of responsibility for the work), and the name
and address of the supervisor.
(c) Scientific or engineering society affiliations and the grade of member-
ship in and certification by each.
(d) Publications, patents and reports.
(e) Three references who will attest to the applicant's character, knowl-
edge of weather modification principles and experience in their application
(f ) A list of all jurisdictions in which the applicant has previously filed
application for a professional weather modification license. The outcome
of such applications should be indicated.
(g) A list of all law suits relating to weather modification from any juris-
diction in which the applicant was a party or where the applicant was
employed by a party thereto at the time involved therein.
(h) Indication whether a professional weather modification license is-
sued to the applicant in any jurisdiction has ever been suspended, revoked,
placed on probationary status or subjected to any other disciplinary actions
or whether there has been refusal to renew such a license by any juris-
diction. If there has been any such suspension, revocation, placement on
probationary status or other disciplinary action or refusal to renew, the
circumstances must be explained in full.
3. Procedure for Issuance. — The Department shall evaluate the applications,
Including the responses from references, and such other relevant data about ap-
plicants as it possesses or discovers. The Department in its discretion shall also
679
have the right to interview any applicant. On the oasis of that information
the Department shall, within sixty days of receipt of an application, determine
whether the applicant meets the educational and experience criteria established
by Subsection 1 of this Rule and whether the applicant possesses the character,
knowledge and experience necessary to engage in weather modification opera-
tions. The Director shall issue a license to each applicant who pays the license
fee established by Section 13 of the Act and who demonstrates to the satisfac-
tion of the Department the competence, by virtue of character, knowledge and
experience, necessary to engage in weather modification operations. If an appli-
cant for a license does not pay the license fee established by Section 13 of the
Act or does not demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Department the compe-
tence, by virtue of character, knowledge and experience, necessary to engage in
weather modification operations, the Department shall deny the application for
the license.
4. Renewal of License. — Forty-five days before expiration of licenses the De-
partment shall mail license application forms to all licensees and request each
licensee to complete the form and file the original with the Department and a
copy with the Chairman of the Board at the Department's address. The Depart-
ment shall evaluate the available data about the licensee and shall issue a
renewal license within thirty days of receipt of the application to each appli-
cant who pays the renewal fee established by Section 13 of the Act and who
has the qualifications necessary for issuance of an original license. The Depart-
ment shall deny a renewal license within thirty days of receipt of the appli-
cation of each applicant who does not pay the renewal fee or who does not
possess the qualifications necessary for issuance of an original license.
RULE 7 PERMITS
1. Criteria for Issuance. — Issuance of permits to conduct weather modification
operations shall be based on the following factors :
(a) The applicant holds, or if the applicant is an organization rather
than an individual, the individual who will be physically present in Illinois
in control of the operation and under whose direction on a day-by-day basis it
will be carried out holds, a valid professional weather modification license
issued under Section 12 of the Act and Rule 6 ;
(b) The applicant has furnished proof of financial responsibility in ac-
cordance with Section 20 of the Act and under Rule 7 (6) ;
(c) The operation has technical and scientific feasibility and is reason-
ably conceived to do all or any of the following : improve water quality or
quantity, reduce losses from weather hazards, provide economic benefits
for the people of the State, ad\tence or enhance scientific knowledge or
otherwise carry out the objectives and purposes of the Act and these Rules ;
(d) The operation does not involve a high degree of substantial risk to
persons or property, is designed to include adequate safeguards to minimize
possible damage to the public health, safety or welfare or to the environ-
ment and includes an emergency shutdown procedure which states con-
ditions under which operations must be suspended because of possible dan-
ger to the public health, safety and welfare or to the environment ;
(e) The operation will not adversely affect another operation for which
a permit has been issued ;
(f ) The operation will not adversely affect any existing research and de-
velopment project exempted from the licensing and permit requirements
by Rule 5 (2) (a) ;
(g) The applicant has complied with the permit fee requirement estab-
lished by Section 18 of the Act .
(h) The applicant has an acceptable plan for evaluation of the operation
by using available surface data from sources such as the United States
Department of Agriculture county crop yield reports, the United States
Geological Survey stream flow gauges, the National Weather Service tern
perature and precipitation gauges and reports and the hail loss insurance
records for the region ; and
(i) The project conforms to such other criteria as are set forth in the
objects and purposes of the Act and of these Rules.
2. Application for Permit. — An applicant for a permit shall fill out and file
with the Department the original of an application form available from the De-
partment and a copy thereof with the Chairman of the Board at the Depart-
680
merit's address no later than thirty days before the applicant plans to use the
permit. The form shall require relevant information about the applicant and
the proposed operation from which the Department can make an informed judg-
ment whether or not to issue the permit and, in case of issuance of the permit,
what conditions and limitations should be placed upon it. Among the data re-
quired is the following information about the applicant and the project :
(a) Name and address of the applicant ;
(b) Whether a weather modification operational permit issued to the ap-
plicant in any jurisdiction has ever been suspended, revoked, placed on
probationary status or subjected to any other disciplinary action or whether
there has been refusal to renew such a permit by any jurisdiction. If there
has been any such suspension, revocation, placement on probationary status
or other disciplinary action or refusal to renew, the circumstances must be
explained in full ;
(c) If the applicant is a corporation, whether it is licensed to do busi-
ness in Illinois ;
(d) Names, addresses and numbers of all professional licenses issued
under Section 12 of the Act and Rule 6 of the individuals in control of the
operation and under whose direction on a day-by-day basis it will be carried
out ;
(e) Whether professional weather modification licenses issued to such
licenses in any jurisdiction have ever been suspended or revoked or placed
on probationary status or subjected to any other disciplinary action or
whether there has been refusal to renew such licenses by any jurisdiction.
If there has been any such suspension, revocation, placement on proba-
tionary status or other disciplinary action, or refusal to renew, the circum-
stances must be explained in full ;
(f) Whether proof of financial responsibility has been furnished in ac-
cordance with Section 20 of the Act and Rule 7(6);
(g) If the operation will be conducted under a contract, the value of the
contract ;
(h) If the operation will not be conducted under a contract, an estimate
of the costs of the operation and information as to how the estimate was
made ;
(i) A copy of any promotional and advertising material used in connec-
tion with negotiations for the contract with the sponsor (if any) ;
(j) A complete and detailed operational plan for the operation which
includes :
(1) The nature and objects of the operation ;
(2) The legal descriptions of and a map showing the operations
area, the target area and the control area (if any) ;
(3) The approximate starting date of the operation and its antici-
pated duration ;
(4) The kind of seeding agent (s) intended for use and the antici-
pated rate of their uses ;
(5) The kinds of weather modification apparatus which will be used
and the method (s) of seeding for which they will be used ;
(6) An emergency shutdown procedure which states conditions under
which operations must be suspended because of possible danger to the
public health, safety and welfare or to the environment ;
(7) The means by which the operation plans will be implemented
and carried out, such as the location of the main operational office and
any other offices used in connection with the operation, the location of
such ground equipment as seeding generators, radar and evaluation
instrumentation, the number and kinds of aircraft which will be used
and the extent to which weather data will be made available to the
licensees and other personnel carrying out the project ; and
(8) How conduct of the operation will interact with other projects;
(k) An acceptable plan for evaluation of the operation prepared in com-
pliance with Rule 7 (1) (h) ; and
(1) Such additional information as will assist the Department in de-
ciding whether or not to issue the permit.
Procedure for Issuance. — The Department shall evaluate all fully executed
applications, using not only information derived from the completed application
forms and accompanying (hem, but also such other relevant data about the
applicants and the proposed operations as it possesses or discovers. The Depart-
681
ment may give public notice by newspaper, radio or television announcement in
the area' of the State reasonably expected to be affected by operations con-
ducted under a permit that it is considering an application or more than one
application for a permit, and may hold a public hearing for the purpose of ob-
taining information from the public concerning the effects of issuing or refusing
to issue the permit. The Department may issue a permit in response to an ap-
plication for an operation if it determines that there has been substantial com-
pliance with Section 17 of the Act and Rule 7(1). Otherwise it shall deny the
application for the permit. The Department shall complete its action upon ap-
plications within thirty days of receiving them.
4. Conditions and Limits of Permits. — The permittee shall confine weather
modification activities within the conditions and limits specified in the permit
and those imposed by the Act and these Rules, except to the extent the condi-
tions and limits are modified by the Department. The Department may con-
dition and limit permits as to target area, time of the operation, materials and
methods to be used in conducting the operation, emergency shutdown procedure
and such other operational requirements as may be established by the Depart-
ment. The Department shall condition and limit all permits in the following
respects :
(a) A permit may cover only one operation ;
(b) When an operation is conducted under contract, a separate permit
is required for each contract ; and
(c) Only one permit will be issued at a time for operations in any geo-
graphical area if two or more operations conducted within the conditions
and limits of the permits might adversely interfere with each other.
5. Duration of Permit. — Within thirty days of the end of each yearly permit
period the permittee shall file a permit application form available from the
Department, an original for the Department and a copy thereof for the Chair-
man of the Board, at the address of the Department. The Department shall
complete its action upon applications within thirty days of receiving them.
6. Proof of Financial Responsibility. — Proof. of financial responsibility is made
by showing to the satisfaction of the Department that the permittee has the
ability to respond in damages to liability which might reasonably result from the
operation for which the permit is sought. Such proof of financial responsibility
may, but shall not be required to be, shown by :
(a) Presentation to the Department of proof of purchase of a prepaid non-
cancellable insurance policy or a corporate surety bond issued by a company
approved by the Department against whom service of legal process may be
made in Illinois against such liabilities in an amount ten times the value
of an operation conducted under contract or in an amount ten times the
estimated costs of an operation not conducted under contract ; or
(b) Depositing with the Department cash or negotiable securities in an
amount ten times the value of an operation conducted under contract or in
an amount five times the estimated costs of an operation not conducted
under contract.
7. Renewal of Permit. — At the expiration of the permit period, the Department
shall issue a renewal permit to each applicant who :
(a) At least thirty clays before expiration of the permit period files the
original of a permit application form available from the Department with
the Department and a copy with the Chairman of the Board at the Depart-
ment's address ;
(b) Meets the criteria for issuance of a permit under Section 17 of the Act
and Rule 7(1), including payment of the permit fee ; and
(c) Has an operational record which indicates that an original permit
would be issuable for the operation.
RULE 8 — RECORDS
1. Daily Log. — Each permittee must fill in and retain a daily log of weather
modification activities for each unit of weather modification apparatus used
during an operation. The log form which will be available from the Department
requires :
(a) Date of the weather modification activity ;
(b) Each aircraft flight track and location of each item of weather modi-
fication apparatus during each modification mission. Maps may be used ;
682
(c) Local time when modification activity began and ended. For intermit-
tent operations, the start and end of the total sequence are acceptable ;
(d) Duration of operation of each unit of weather modification apparatus,
in hours and minutes ;
(e) Description of type of modification agent used ;
(f) Rate of dispersal of agent during the period of actual operation of
weather modification apparatus, by hour or other appropriate time period ;
(g) Total amount of modification agent used. If more th,an one agent was
used, report total for each type separately ;
(h) Local time when any radar monitoring operation was turned on and
turned off;
(i) Type of clouds modified, that is whether they were stratiform, isolated
cumuliform. organized cumuliform or other types of clouds ;
(j) Remarks indicating such operational problems as equipment failure,
weather conditions not conducive to successful performance of the operation,
personnel problems and the like ; and
(k) Monthly totals from daily logs listing the total :
(1) Days during month in which operation conducted ;
( 2 ) Time of operation ;
(3) Amount of each kind of agent used ;
(4) Average rate of dispersal of each kind of agent used;
(5) Time of operation of radar ; and
(6) Days of each type of cloud treated.
2. Weather Records. — Each permittee must obtain and retain copies of all daily
precipitation total records available from the National Weather Service stations
in the target area and other sources.
3. Summary Records. — Each permittee must prepare a monthly summary of
the monthly totals from the daily logs of all units of weather modification ap-
paratus used during an operation.
4. Addresses of Participants. — Each permittee must keep a roster of the names
and Illinois addresses of all employees participating in the State on an operation
for which a permit has been issued.
5. Inspection. — Duly authorized agents of the Department shall have the power
to enter and inspect the records required by this Rule and to make copies of them.
6. Exempted Weather Modification Activities. — The Department may in its
discretion require persons operating weather modification activities exempted
under Rule 5 (2) to keep all or part of the record required of permittees by this
Rule. These records shall be kept in such manner as the Department may
indicate.
RULE 9 — REPORTS
1. Monthly. — Within ten days after the conclusion of each calendar month the
permittee shall submit a report to the Department which shall consist of:
( a ) A copy of the summary record prepared under Rule 8(3);
(b) A copy of the roster of the names and Illinois addresses of all em-
ployees participating in the State on an operation which was prepared
under Rule 8(4) ;
(c) A copy of the federal interim activity report form filed for that month
with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in accordance
with the rules adopted under the authority of Public Law 92-205; and
(d) A narrative account of the manner in which operations during the
month did not conform to the operational plan filed in accordance with Rule
7 (2) (j).
2. Pinal. — Within thirty days after completion of the operation the permittee
shall file with the Department a final report on the operation which shall consist
of:
(a) Copies of the logs prepared in accordance with Rule 8 (1), of the
weather records obtained in accordance with Rule 8 (2) and of the totals
for the entire operational period from the monthly summary records pre-
pared under Rule 8 (3) ;
(b) A copy of the federal final activity report form filed with the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in accordance with the rules
adopted under the authority of Public Law 92-205 ; and
(c) A narrative account of the manner in which the operation did not
conform to the operational plan filed in accordance with Rule 7 (2) (j).
683
3. Evaluation. — Within sixty days after completion of the operation the per-
mittee shall file with the Department a narrative evaluation of the operation. The
data for this report should be assembled and evaluated in accordance with the
evaluation plan prepared in compliance with Rule 7 (1) (h).
4. Reports to Sponsors. — The permittee shall file with the Department a copy
of all reports made by the permittee to sponsors of the operation.
5. Exempted Weather Modification Activities. — The Department may in its
discretion require persons operating weather modification activities exempted
under Rule 5 (2) but who have been required under Rule 8 (6) to keep certain
records to file all or part of the reports required of permittees by this Rule. These
records shall be kept in such manner as the Department may indicate.
6. Public Records. — All reports which are in the custody of the Department and
which have been filed with it under the Act or Rule 9 shall be kept open for public
examination as public documents during regular business hours of the Depart-
ment's office located at the Department's address.
RULE 10 — PARTIAL INVALIDITY
If any portion of these Rules is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect
any other part of these Rules which can be given effect without the invalid
portion.
Kansas
The Kansas Weather Modification Act
state statutes, rules and regulations plus applicable forms
Prepared and Published by the Kansas Water Resources Board, Suite 303,
503 Kansas Avenue, Topeka, Kans. 66603
Preface
While rain making has been one of man's objectives for several thousands of
years, it has only been within the past half century that he has begun to grasp
some of the scientific reasons for weather events which he has observed and
speculated on throughout history.
With a clear recognition of the potential of weather modification for benefit or
harm, and in view of the lack of hard facts with respect to the possible benefits
and financial and social costs of such efforts in Kansas, it appeared wise for the
state to seek to provide usable knowledge and reasonable protection to its citizens
against irresponsible acts which might adversely affect them.
With this in mind, the 1974 Kansas Legislature passed H.B. 1216 which appears
as Kansas Statutes Annotated 82a-1401 to 1424. This act, cited as the "Kansas
Weather Modification Act," provides for licensing by the state of all qualified
persons who desire to engage in weather modification activities within the state,
and further requires that a permit be obtained for each specific activity. Responsi-
bility for administering the act has been placed with the Kansas Water Resources
Board.
The law also required the Board to appoint an Advisory Committee to assist
the Executive Director of the Board in developing licensing standards and report
forms, and to assist in other areas as directed by the Board.
This booklet contains a copy of the law, a copy of the rules and regulations
prepared in cooperation with the Advisory Committee, a copy of the required
forms, and instructions for preparation of the forms.
The objectives of the rules and regulations are to encourage the development
and evaluation of weather modification technology, to protect the public through
the requirement that operators in this field possess certain basic qualifications,
to establish procedures for the issuance of permits with a minimum of delay
and to clarify administrative policy.
These rules may be amended in accordance with procedures set forth in K.S.A.
77-419.
To Whom Should A Weather Modification License and Permit Be Issued?
WEATHER MODIFICATION LICENSE
The Kansas Weather Modification Act provides that a license may be issued to
any qualified person. That person must be an individual. A corporation cannot
684
demonstrate its knowledge of meteorology and weather modification operations ;
that is the realm of the individual who may be a member of a corporation or
political entity.
Only an individual can meet the requirements of 1976 Supp. K.S.A. 82a-1407
and 1412. If a company chooses to license several of its staff in order to meet the
requirements of 1412, that is its prerogative. However, a license is not transfer-
able since it applies to a specific individual and his capabilities.
WEATHER MODIFICATION PERMIT
In contrast to the conditions for a license, a permit may be obtained by an
individual, a corporation, or any other "person" which meets the requirements of
K.S.A. 82a-1411, since all activities must be under the direction of a licensed
individual. In making application for a permit, the licensee who will be carrying
out the provisions of the permit should be required to state in writing that he
can carry out the provisions of the permit as specified in the operational plan
which is to accompany the approved permit.
Rules and Regulations — General
98-4-1 PURPOSE
These rules and regulations were prepared pursuant to K.S.A. 82a-1403 by the
Executive Director within the authority granted by the Kansas Water Resources
Board and in consultation with the Advisory Committee appointed by the Board.
The purpose of developing licensing standards and report forms and establishing
minimum operating requirements for weather modification activities in Kansas
is to expand knowledge, minimize conflicts, and assure the use of the most effec-
tive methods of carrying on such operations. K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 82a-1403
98-4-2 DEFINITIONS
1. "Board" means the Kansas Water Resources Board.
2. "Director" means the Executive Director of the Kansas Water Resources
Board.
3. "Emergency" means an unusual condition which could not have reasonably
been expected or foreseen ; one in which it can be anticipated that damage can be
avoided or reduced by prompt weather modification action.
4. "License" means the document issued by the Director to qualified persons
who make application therefor, authorizing such persons to engage in weather
modification activities in Kansas.
5. "Licensee" means an individual who has applied for and to whom a weather
modification license has been issued.
6. "Permit" means the document issued by the Director authorizing weather
modification activity in Kansas, which describes the objectives of the activity, the
area in which the activity is to take place, the time within which the operation
is to be active, and anticipated results.
7. "Primary Target Area" means the area within which weather modification
activity is intended to have an effect.
8. "Research and Development" means exploration, field experimentation
and/or extension of investigative findings and theories.
9. "Weather Modification Activity" means any operation or experimental
process which lias as its objective inducing change, bv artificial means, in the
composition, behavior, or dynamics of the atmosphere. K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 82a-1403.
98-4-3 LICENSING
1. No person may engage in any weather modification activity within the State
of Kansas without a license and a permit.
2. In order to obtain a license under the Kansas Weather Modification Act the
applicant must :
a. Make application for a license in Kansas to the Board on Form KWM
#1. (Copy attached) To assure timely consideration, this should be sub-
mitted at least forty-five (45) days prior to the start of the proposed opera-
tional period.
685
b. Pay the $100.00 license fee unless that fee is waived by a decision of the
Board because of the educational or experimental nature of the work pro-
posed. The candidate for exemption must prove to the satisfaction of the
Director and the Advisory Committee, if consulted, that the nature of the
work merits exemption from fees.
c. Meet one of the following professional or educational requirements :
(1) Eight (8) years of professional experience in weather modifica-
tion field research or activities and at least three (3) years as a project
director,
(2) A baccalaureate degree in applicable courses and three (3) years
experience in application of such studies to weather modification
activities.
(3) A baccalaureate degree including 25 hours of meteorological
studies and two (2) years of practical experience in weather modifica-
tion research or activities.
d. Demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Director, by his knowledge of
meteorology, cloud physics, and field experience, that he is qualified to con-
duct a weather modification project of the kind he wishes to conduct in
Kansas.
3. Each license shall expire at the end of the calendar year for which it is
issued.
4. Weather modification licenses may be renewed annually, effective January 1
each year. Renewal will be automatic upon the following conditions :
a. Receipt of a request for renewal by the license holder.
b. Receipt of the $100.00 annual license fee, if applicable.
c. Verification by the Director or the Board that evidence has not become
available that would raise doubts as to the qualifications of the license holder.
K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 82a-1403
©8-4-4 PERMITS
1. A weather modification permit shall be required annually, on a calendar year
basis, for each weather modification project. In those cases when a weather modi-
fication activity will extend over more than one calendar year, a permit may be
extended on a year-to-year basis upon payment of the annual fee, a review by the
Director and, if desirable, his Advisory Committee, and the publication of a no-
tice of intent to continue the operation. The Director shall determine whether a
public hearing is needed.
2. A permit may not be assigned nor transferred by the holder.
3. Permit applications should, if possible, be submitted at least forty-five (45)
days prior to the initial date of the proposed operational period for which the
permit is sought. This will allow time to hold a public hearing, review the infor-
mation presented, and permit action by the Board prior to the proposed starting
date of the project.
4. In order to modify the boundaries of a project for which a permit has previ-
ously been obtained, a revised permit will be required, under conditions similar
to those under which the original permit was issued, or as modified by the
Director.
5. In order to obtain a permit to conduct weather modification activities in Kan-
sas, an applicant must :
a. Submit to the Director a completed Form KWM No. 2. (Copy attached.)
b. Pay the $100.00 permit fee, if applicable.
c. Present evidence that the applicant is, or has in its employ, a licensee.
d. Demonstrate proof of ability to meet the liability requirements of Sec-
tion 1411(4) of the Kansas Weather Modification Act. This proof may be pro-
vided in the form of an insurance policy written by a company authorized to
do business in Kansas or by a statement of individual worth which is satis-
factory to the Director.
e. Submit a complete and satisfactory operational plan for the proposed
weather modification project, which includes :
(1) A map of the proposed operating area which specifies the primary
target area and shows the area reasonably expected to be affected.
(2) The name and address of the licensee.
(3) The nature and object of the intended weather modification activi-
ties.
(4) The meteorological criteria to be used to initiate or suspend modifi-
cation activities.
34-857 O - 79 - 46
686
(5) The person or organization on whose behalf it is to be conducted.
(6) A statement showing any expected effect upon the environment.
(7) The methods that will be used in determining and evaluating the
proposed weather modification project.
(8) Such other information as may be required by the Director.
f. Publish a "notice of intent" to engage in weather modification activities
in each county of which all or part may be within the primary target area or
within the areas reasonably expected to be affected, at least seven (7) days
prior to the required public hearing. The time and place of the public hearing
must be approved by the Director. The "notice of intent" shall include notice
in a newspaper or newspapers of general circulation in the area. In addition,
the use of radio and television spot announcements is encouraged. The notice
shall :
(1) Describe the primary target area.
(2) Describe the area which might reasonably be affected.
(3) Specify the period of operation including starting and ending
dates, which operation need not be continuous.
(4) Describe the general method of operation.
(5) Describe the intended effect of the operation.
(6) State the time and place of a public hearing on the application;
the hearing to be in or near the primary target area.
(7) State that complete details of the application for a permit will be
available for examination in the office of the Water Resources Board in
Topeka and at a location within the project area as described in the
public hearing notice.
g. Provide satisfactory evidence of publication of the "notice of intent" to
the Director prior to the public hearing.
6. At the discretion of the Director, additional information may be required of
the applicant. The additional information required may include a comprehen-
sive environmental impact analysis similar to the statements required for federal
projects.
7. Any permit issued for a weather modification activity shall be subject to re-
vision, suspension, or modification of its terms and conditions by the Director, if
necessary to protect the health, safety, or property of any person or to protect the
environment. K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 82a-1403
98-4-5 EVALUATION OF PERMIT APPLICATION
Permit applications will be evaluated based on the following considerations :
1. The project can reasonably be expected to benefit the residents of the primary
target area or an important segment of the state's population.
2. The testimony and information presented at the public hearing is generally
favorable to the proposed activity.
3. Economic, social, or research benefits are expected :
a. If the application is for a commercial project, the project is scientifically
and technically feasible.
b. If the application is for a scientific or research project, it offers promise
of expanding the knowledge and technology of weather modification.
4. The applicant has provided adequate safeguards against potentially hazard-
ous effects to health, property, or environment and has outlined a program for
the implementation of these safeguards.
5. The proposed project will not have any detrimental effect on the previously
authorized weather modification projects.
G. The project is to be under the personal direction, on a day-to-day basis, of
an individual who holds a valid license, issued under the Kansas Weather Modifi-
cation Act. K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 82a-1403
9 8-4-6 REPORTS
1. The permit holder will maintain at his project office a current (within 24
hours) log of all operations. This log must he available for inspection by persons
i
687
so authorized by the Director. The log will include information at least equiva-
lent to that on Form KWM No. 3. (Copy attached)
2. Reports of weather modification activities under the permit will be made
monthly to the Director for each calendar month for which the permit is valid.
These should be submitted by the 15th day of the following month. Copies of all
entries made on Weather Modification Form KWM No. 3 shall be submitted when
making these reports unless a more detailed form is agreed to at the time the
permit is granted.
3. - A preliminary report shall be made within thirty (30) days after the end of
each calendar year or within thirty (30) days after the end of the project, which-
ever comes first, with a final report on the project submitted not later than ninety
(90) days following the end of the project. These reports shall include :
a. Monthly and project period totals for information required on Form
KWM No. 3.
b. The permit holder's interpretation of project effects as compared to
those anticipated in the original application for the permit. K.S.A. 1974
Supp. 82a-1403
98-4-7 PROCEDURE FOR GRANTING EMERGENCY PERMITS
1. A permit may be granted on an emergency basis through the waiving of
regular rules of procedure when evidence is presented that clearly identifies the
situation as an emergency as defined in 98-4-2 (3) .
2. Upon presentation of evidence satisfactory to the Director that a condition
exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the very near future that may
be alleviated or overcome by weather modification activities, the Director shall
issue a permit *o an individual holding a license issued under this Act. Coincident
with the issuance of the permit, the Director shall also release to the news media
in the area intended to be affected, the information contained in the permit.
3. Within ten (10) days after the granting of an emergency permit, and if
the permittee desires to continue his activities, the Director shall set a date for
a public hearing and the permittee will provide public notice of such hearing
through the regular news media in the area. At the public meeting, the permittee
shall describe :
a. The objectives of the emergency action.
b. The success to date.
c. His future plans under the permit.
On the basis of the information presented at this public hearing and the re-
sponse of the local people, the Director will then decide whether to revoke the
emergency permit, modify it, or permit its continued operation under conditions
specified by the Director. K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 82a-1403
98-4-8 PROCEDURE FOR SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF PERMITS
1. Automatic Suspension of Permit. — Any weather modification permit issued
under the terms of the Kansas Weather Modification Act will be suspended auto-
matically if the licensee's weather modification license expires or if the person
designated as being in control of the project becomes incapacitated or leaves
the employment of the permit holder and a replacement approved by the Board
is not on the job site. A permit which is suspended for these reasons may be
reinstated by the Board following renewal of the expired license or submission
of an amended personnel statement nominating a person whose qualifications for
a license are acceptable to the Board.
2. Emergency Suspension of a Permit. — When an emergency exists or appears
imminent, or the Director has been notified of a probable impending emergency,
he may order the immediate suspension of all weather modification operations
within the area affected by such condition. This notification shall be given in the
most expeditious manner. If the telephone is used to give this notice, it is to be
followed promptly by a letter of particulars addressed to the permit holder and
stating the time and place for holding a hearing on the question of taking per-
manent action on the permit if the Director determines such a hearing is neces-
sary or desirable. Whether or not the permit is reinstated by the Director, and
when such reinstatement may take place, will depend upon the conditions that
develop within the permit area or when the requirements of the Director are
met. Failure of the licensee to notify the Director of an existing or impending
688
emergency- which should have reasonably been forseen may be grounds for revo-
cation of the permit and the operator's license. K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 82a-1403
98-4-9 PROCEDURE FOR SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSES
1. The Board may suspend or revoke any existing license for the following
reasons :
a. The licensee is found not to possess the qualifications necessary to meet
the requirements of the law.
b. The licensee has violated one or more of the provisions of his license,
the Kansas Weather Modification Act, or these rules.
c. It has reason to believe that the weather modification efforts of the
licensee may produce undesirable effects.
2. When the Director has reason to believe that a condition exists which would
be a basis for the suspension or revocation of a license, he shall so inform the
Board with a recommendation for suspension or revocation. If the Board deter-
mines that the situation requires a hearing, the Director shall, at least thirty
(30) days prior to the meeting of the Board at which the matter will be con-
sidered, notify the licensee and any other interested party of the pending Board
action. The hearing shall be conducted as provided for in the Kansas Weather
Modification Act.
The notice to the licensee shall include :
a. The Director's recommendation to the Board ;
b. The reasons for the Director's recommendation ; and
c. The time and place of the Board meeting at which the matter will be
heard. The licensee or any other interested party may attend the Board
meeting at which the Board will make its determination and may present
relevant evidence to the Board concerning the revocation or suspension.
K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 82a-1403
98-4-10 FIELD OPERATIONS
1. As provided under section 98-4-5, paragraph 6, there shall be the license
holder or a substitute approved by the Director on duty at the project site at
all times while weather modification activities are being carried out.
2. In order to supply local guidance to eacli weather modification project, the
permit holder may seek the advice and assistance of concerned citizens within
the area affected by weather modification activity. This group, which may be
selected at the time of the public hearing, must be approved by the Director. This
local advisory group may :
a. Assist in developing the operational plan ;
b. Assist in financial arrangements ; and
c. Assist the Director in the evaluation of the project.
3. The permit holder shall not conduct activities outside the limits stated
in the operational plan ( 98-4-4 ( 5e )) . Activities planned for periods of severe
weather shall be stated in the permit application and identified at the public
hearing on the application for a permit. K.S.A. 1974 Supp. 82a-1403
Kansas Water Resources Board Form KWM No. 1
Application for License To Engage in Weather Modification Activity
Within the State of Kansas
1. Name of applicant
2. Business address
3. Applicant intends to do business on an (individual, partnership, consultant,
employee, corporation, other).
4. Print below the full name and address of all personnel to be engaged in
weather modification activities who may be in control and in charge of activities
for applicant.
Full Name
(Do not use initials)
I
Residence or Business Address
689
5. Has any person listed under "Personnel" been denied a license to conduct
a license suspended or revoked? If so, attach a detailed statement.
or participate in weather modification activities in Kansas or elsewhere, or had
6. Give the name, education, experience, and qualifications of the person or
persons who may be in control and in charge of weather modification activities.
(If more than one, attach additional sheets) .
NAME:
Course of study Years or semester Graduated (yes or no)
(major) hours and year of graduation
Junior College 1 2
College or university 1 2 3 4 (Degree)
University graduate study (Degree)
Certificates of professional or vocational competence
or license.
Membership status in professional or technical
associations.
EXPERIENCE IN WEATHER MODIFICATION OPERATIONS, EXPERIMENTS, OR PLANNING
[Begin with most recent experience]
From To Occupations and descriptions of
duties (list each position Fmployers (name, address, and
Month Year Month Year separately) type of business)
7. Special education and experience qualifications (publications, reports,
awards).
8. Specific type(s) of weather modification activity (ies) which applicant
wishes to be licensed to perform (fog dispersal, hail suppression, rain augmenta-
tion, etc.).
I certify that the information contained in this application is correct to the
best of my knowledge.
Signature Date
Subscribed and sworn to or affirmed before me —
This day of 19
Title
Notary Public in and for the County of , State of
Form KWM No. 2
Application for a Permit to Engage in a Weather Modification Activity
Within the State of Kansas
1. Name of applicant _.
2. Business address , ,
3. Person (s) who will be in control and in charge of activity.
4. Kansas Weather Modification License Number (s)
5. Does applicant wish to be considered exempt from fee requirements of the
Kansas Weather Modification Act (K.S.A. 82a-1406 ( b ) ) .
If so, give justification.
6. Primary purpose (s) of the weather modification activity to be conducted
under the permit :
7. Person (s) or organization on whose behalf the proposed weather modifica-
tion activity is to be conducted :
8. In accordance with the requirements, of K.S.A. 82a-1411(a) and the rules
and regulations applicable thereto, the following attachments are submitted with
this application :
(a) Permit fee in the form of .
(b) Proof of financial responsibility in the form of.
(c) Proposed operational plan.
(d) Proposed Notice of Intent to engage in weather modification activities.
690
(e) Contracts or agreements applicable to the conduct and execution of the
proposed weather modification activity.
I hereby make application for a permit under the Kansas Weather Modification
Act. K.S.A. 82a-1401-1424.
Signature- Date
Instructions for Completing Daily Log Form KWM No. 3
This form is suitable for recording the operation of individual items of-«irborne
<»i- ground-based equipment. For clarity, a separate log should be kept for each
such piece of equipment. (Each aircraft, ground generator, etc.) In order to avoid
duplication of effort, daily log forms required by federal regulations may be used
in hen of this form, if the following instructions are carried out in completing
the federal forms.
691
A. A separate seeding event, requiring entries in all appropriate columns, shall
be logged whenever :
(a) The cloud or cloud system being modified can reasonably be considered
unaffected by previous release of seeding agents (Col. 2).
(b) The time since the last release of seeding agent exceeds one hour (Col.
3 and 4).
(c) The type of seeding agent used, or its rate of application, is changed
(Col. 6 and 7).
(d) The cloud form being seeded changes (Col. 9-12).
B. Explanation of column entries.
Col. (1) : Give date by calendar month and day.
Col. (2) : Give aircraft position or location of ground-based equipment.
Aircraft position may use VOR-DME or be given in miles (10 statute miles or
less) from nearby towns or landmarks, (e.g. 7 miles SSE of Tribune).
Col. (3 and 4) : State local time when modification activity began and
ended. Use 24-hour clock time (e.g., 0100 signifies 1:00 A.M. and 2300 sig-
nifies 11 :00 P.M. ) . For intermittent operations, the start and end of the
total sequence are acceptable.
Col. (5) : Give duration of operation of each unit of weather modification
apparatus, in hours and minutes. (Col. 5=Col. 4— Col. 3).
Col. (6) : Describe seeding agent used, such as silver iodide pyrotechnic
flares, silver iodide in acetone solution, sodium chloride, liquid urea, dry ice,
etc.
Col. (7) : Give rate of dispersal of seeding agent in gm./min., lbs./min. or
other appropriate units.
Col. (8) : Give total amount of seeding agent used.
Col. (9-12) : Identify the predominant cloud or precipitation type being
modified, such as snow or rain from stratiform clouds, rain or hail from
cumuliform clouds, etc.
C. On the daily log sheet for the last day of each month, give monthly totals
for Columns (2, 5, 8, and 9-12) .
North Dakota
North Dakota Weather Modification Board
rules and regulations relating to weather modification operations and rules
of practice and procedure pertaining to hearings before the board
(Adopted on July 1, 1976, North Dakota Century Code Chapter 2-07— Weather
Modification)
State of North Dakota,
Bismarck, N. Dak,, May 18, 1976.
Mr. Martin R. Shock,
Director, North Dakota Weather Modification Board, Bismarck, N.D.
Dear Mr. Shock : We have examined the proposed regulations titled "Rules
and Regulations of the North Dakota Weather Modification Board" and "Rules
of Practice and Procedure Before the North Dakota Weather Modification Board"
which you submitted to this office by your letter of April 30, 1976. From our
examination, it is our opinion that when they have been duly adopted by the
Weather Modification Board, and filed in accordance with Chapter 28-32 of the
North Dakota Century Code, they will be valid and binding regulations having
the force and effect of law.
Sincerely,
Allen I. Olson,
Attorney General.
Rules and Regulations of the North Dakota
Weather Modification Board
r2-07-01 general provisions
01.100 Scope : These regulations are promulgated pursuant to Chapter 2-07 of
the North Dakota Century Code and shall apply to any weather modification
operation conducted wholly or partially within the state of North Dakota. These
regulations shall be applied in conjunction with Chapter 2-07.
692
01.200 Definitions : As used in these regulations, the following words shall have
the meaning given to them below unless otherwise made inappropriate by use
and context. Words not defined in this section shall have the meaning given to
them in Chapter 2-07.
01.201 "Act" shall mean Chapter 2-07 of the North Dakota Century Code.
01.202 "Applicant" shall mean any person who applies for a professional
weather modification license pursuant to the provisions of the Act and these
regulations.
01.203 "Board" shall mean the North Dakota Weather Modification Board.
01.204 "Director" shall mean the Executive Director of the North Dakota
Weather Modification Board.
01.205 "License" shall mean a weather modification license issued under these
regulations and Section 2-07-03.3 of the Act.
01.206 "Licensee" shall mean a person to whom a license has been issued.
01.207 "Permit" shall mean a weather modification permit issued under these
regulations and Section 2-07-04 of the Act.
01.208 "Permittee" shall mean a person to whom a permit has been issued.
01.209 "Operations area" shall mean an area in which weather modification
operations are conducted.
01.210 "Target area" shall mean an area in which the effects of weather modifi-
cation are desired.
01.211 "Weather modification apparatus" shall mean any device used to dis-
pense any chemical material used to modify any weather condition.
01.300 Administration : Except as otherwise provided in Sections 05.204 and
10.203 of these regulations, the powers and duties of the Board shall be exercised
by the Director and such other persons as he may direct.
R2-07-02 EXEMPT ACTIVITIES
02.100 Notice to Board : Any person intending to conduct any exempt activities
under the provisions of Section 2-07-03.1 of the Act shall furnish notice of such
intention to the Board at least thirty (30) days prior to the time such activities
are to begin. Notice shall consist of the following information and such other
information as the Board deems necessary.
02.101 Name and address of the person giving notice ;
02.202 Name and address of the person who will conduct the activity ;
02.203 A description of the procedures to be used in the operation or the re-
search and development ;
02.204 A description of the object of the activity :
02.205 The legal description of, and a map showing the area of, the operations
area and target area, if any ;
02.206 The date upon which the activity is to commence and its approximate
duration ; and
02.207 A description of the equipment to be used in conducting the activity.
02.20K Approval of Exempt Activities : No weather modification activity in-
tended to be conducted pursuant to the provisions of Section 2-07-03.1 of the
Act shall be commenced without prior approval of the Board if such activity is
to be conducted in the out-of-doors with weather modification apparatus. The
Board may approve only those activities which provide for the protection of the
health, safety and welfare of those persons who may be affected by such activ-
ities, and which otherwise comply with the provisions of Section 2-07-03.1.
R2-07-03 ACQUISITION OF LICENSE
03.100 License Required: Every person intending to conduct operations in this
state shall designate to the Board, on forms furnished by the Board, at least one
natural person who shall at all times be physically present during all operations
for which a permit is required and who will be in control of such operations.
03.200 Criteria for Issuance: The competence of any applicant to engage in
weather modification operations shall be demonstrated to the Board pursuant
to Section 2-07-03.3 of the Act upon the showing that the natural person desig-
nated by the applicant pursuant to Section 03.100 has :
03.201 A minimum of one year of field experience in the management and con-
trol of weather modification operations or research ; and
06.202 One of the following requirements :
(l)Four additional years experience in weather modification operations
or research ; or
693
(2) A degree in mathematics, engineering, or the physical sciences, plus
two years additional experience in weather modification operations or re-
search ; or
(3) A degree in meteorology: or a degree in engineering, mathematics, or
the physical sciences which includes at least twenty-five semester hours of
course work in meteorology.
In determining competency, the Board may also consider any other items to be
set forth in a license application pursuant to Section 03.300.
03.300 Application Procedure : An applicant for a license shall apply to the
Board on forms supplied by the Board. The forms may require relevant informa-
tion about the knowledge and experience of the applicant and the natural person
designated under Section 03.100, and shall include the following :
03.301 Educational background, at the college and graduate level of both
the natural person designated by the applicant and the other employees of the
applicant. This includes the dates of attendance and of graduation, the major
and minor subjects (including the number of semester hours of meteorological
course work), the degrees received, and the titles of any thesis and/or dis-
sertation.
03.302 Experience in weather modification or related activities of both the
natural person designated by the applicant and the other employees of the
applicant. Attention should be given to experience with reference to meteorological
conditions typical of North Dakota. The applicant should list the dates of each
position held by the natural person designated pursuant to Section 03.100, the
title of the position (indicate whether it was of subprofessional or professional
level), the name and address of the employer, a description of the work done
(indicate both the magnitude and complexity of the work and the duties and
degree of responsibility for the work), and the name and address of the super-
visor.
03.303 Scientific or engineering society affiliations of the natural person desig-
nated by the applicant and the grade of membership in and certification by each.
03.304 Publications, patents and reports of the natural person designated by the
applicant.
03.303 Three references who will attest to such natural person's character,
knowledge and experience.
03.306 A list of all jurisdictions in which the applicant has previously filed
application for a professional weather modification license. The results of the,
applications should be indicated.
03.307 Indication whether a professional weather modification license issued
to the applicant in any jurisdiction has ever been suspended or revoked or
whether there has been refusal to renew such a license by any jurisdiction.
If the answer is yes. the circumstances must be explained in detail.
03.400 Procedure for Issuance : The Board shall evaluate the applications,
including responses from any references given by the applicant. On the basis
of all such information the Board shall, within thirty days of receipt of an
application, determine whether the natural person designated by the license
applicant under Section 03.100 meets the education and experience criteria
established by subsections 03.201 and 03.202 and whether such person and the
applicant possess the knowledge and experience necessary to engage in weather
modification operations and shall issue a license to the applicant who satisfies
the requirements of these regulations and Section 2-07-03.3 of the Act. If an
applicant for a license or the natural person designated by the applicant do not
satisfy any of such requirements, the Board shall deny the license.
03.500 Renewal of License : Forty-five days before expiration of licenses, the
Board shall mail license application forms to all licensees and request each
licensee to complete the form and file the original with the Board. The Board
shall evaluate the available data about the licensee and the natural person desig-
nated by the license applicant under Section 03.100 and shall issue a renewal
license within thirty days of receipt of the application to each applicant who
pays the license fee established by Section 2-07-03.3(1) of the Act and who has
the qualifications necessary for issuance of an original license. The Board shall
deny a renewal license within thirty days of receipt of the application of each
applicant who does not pay the renewal fee or who does not possess the qualifi-
cations necessary for issuance of an original license or who does not designate
a natural person, pursuant to Section 03.100, who satisfies the requirements
of Section 03.200.
694
03.600 Responsibility of Controller: The natural person designated by the
license applicant under Section 03.100 is deemed by the Board to be in control
of and primarily responsible for operations conducted under the terms of any
permit. However nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent appropriate
enforcement of any regulation, limitation, permit condition, or order against
either the permittee, or licensee, whether or not such licensee is a natural person.
R2-07 04 LICENSES-SUSPENSION, REVOCATION AND RESTORATION
04.100 Suspension, Revocation, Refusal to Renew a License: The Board may
suspend, revoke or refuse to renew a license for any one or any combination of
the following reasons :
04.101 Incompetency ;
04.102 Dishonest practice ;
04.103 False or fraudulent representation in obtaining a license or permit
under the Act or these Rules ;
04.104 Failure to comply with any of the provisions of the Act or of these
Rules ; and
04.105 Violation of any permit or permit condition.
04.200 Restoration of License : At any time after the suspension or revocation
of a license or after refusal to renew a license the Board may restore it to the
licensee or renew it upon a finding that the requirements for issuance of an
original license have been met by the licensee.
R2-07-05 PERMITS — APPLICATION, CRITERIA, ISSUANCE
05.100 Application for Permit : Application for a weather modification permit
shall be made on forms furnished by the Board. A properly executed application
shall be submitted to the Board by every applicant. The application may con-
tain such information as the Board deems necessary, and shall include the fol-
lowing information :
05.101 Name and address of the applicant ;
05.102 Whether a weather modification operational permit issued to the
applicant in any jurisdiction has ever been suspended or revoked or whether
there has been refusal to renew such a permit by any jurisdiction. If the
answer is yes, the circumstances must be explained in detail ;
05.103 If the applicant is a corporation, whether it is licensed to do business
in North Dakota ;
05.104 Whether a license has been issued under Section 2-07-03.3 of the Act,
and if so, the names, addresses and professional license numbers of the
controller (s) ;
05.105 Whether professional weather modification licenses issued to such
licensee (s) in any jurisdiction have ever been suspended or revoked or whether
there has been refusal to renew such license (s) by any jurisdiction. If the an-
swer is yes, the circumstances must be explained in detail ;
05.106 Whether proof of financial responsibility has been furnished in accord-
ance with Section 2-07-O4-3 of the Act and regulation R2-07M)8 ;
05.107 If the operation will be conducted under a contract, the value of the
contract ;
05.108 If the operation will not be conducted under a contract, an estimate
of the costs of the operation and information as to how the estimate was made ;
05.100 Whether the applicant has paid the application fee ;
05.110 Whether the applicant has North Dakota workmen's compensation
coverage ;
05.111 A copy of any promotional and advertising material used in connec-
tion with negotiations for the contract (if any) ;
05.112 Whether the applicant has furnished a performance bond, as required
by subsection 10.204 of these rules ;
05.113 Whether the applicant has furnished a bid bond, as required bv Section
2-07 09.1 of the Act ;
or, 1 1 i Whether the applicant has registered all pilots and aircraft to be used
in the operation for which the permit is sought with the North Dakota Aero-
nautics Commission.
05.115 A complete and detailed operational plan for the operation which
includes :
( 1 ) The nature and object of the operation :
(2) The legal descriptions of. and a map showing the operations area,
and the target, area ;
695
(3) The approximate starting date of the operation and its anticipated
duration ;
(4) The kind of seeding agent (s) intended for use and the anticipated
rate of their use ;
(5) A list of equipment which will be used and the method (s) of seeding
for which they will be used ;
(6) An emergency shutdown procedure which states conditions under
which operations will be suspended because of possible danger to the public
health, safety and welfare or to the environment ;
(7) The means by which the operation plans will be implemented and
carried out; such as the location of the main operational office and any
other offices used in connection with the operation, the location of such
ground equipment as seeding generators, radar and evaluation instrumen-
tation, the number and kinds of aircraft which will be used and the extent
to which weather data will be made available to the licensees and other
personnel carrying out the project ; and
(8) How conduct of the operation will interact with or affect other weath-
er modification operations.
05.116 The application shall show an acceptable plan for evaluation of the
operation by the use of surface data reasonably available to the applicant.
05.117 Such additional information as will assist the Board in deciding whether
or not to issue the permit.
05.200 Procedure for issuance :
05.201 Notice : The Board shall give notice of its consideration of an applica-
tion in accordance with Section 2-07-04.1 of the Act. Notice shall be given once
a week for two consecutive weeks. The notice shall :
(1) Describe the primary target area.
(2) Describe the operations area.
(3) Specify the period of operation including starting and ending dates.
(4) Describe the general method of operation.
(5) Describe the intended effect of the operation.
(6) State the name of the proposed permittee.
05.202 Hearings : The Board shall allow twenty days for public comment, in
accordance with Section 2-07-04.1 of the Act. from the date of the last pulbica-
tion of the notice. Any hearing held upon objection received by the Board or any
hearing held upon the Board's own motion shall be held upon at least ten days
notice in the county newspaper in which notice of consideration of the applica-
tion was published. At any such hearing, the Board shall make a brief record
of testimony received, and shall consider all such testimony in its decision on
the permit application.
05.203 Director's Recommendation : At the close of the public comment period
provided for in Section 2-07-04.1 of the xVct. the Director of Weather Modifica-
tion Board shall review all applications for permits which have been received
and shall recommend approval or disapproval of such applications and the
reasons therefor.
05.204 Final Action by Board : The Board shall take final action on all applica-
tions for permits for which notice of consideration was published, pursuant to
Section 2-07-04.1 of the Act within 45 days of the close of the public comment
period. Approval of applications considered shall be by majority vote. In acting
on any such applications, the Board shall consider any recommendations made
by the Director of the Board and all testimony received at any hearing pursuant
to Section 2-07-04.1 of the Act. The Board may issue a permit only if it determines
that the requirements of Section 2-07-04(2) of the Act have been met.
R2-07-06 PERMITS FORM, CONDITIONS, EXPIRATION
06.100 Permit form : Each permit shall set forth the permit number, effective
period of the permit, name of the permittee, the name of the licensee and the
license number, the location of the operation, and such other information, terms
or conditions as the Board shall deem appropriate.
06.200 Permit conditions : The Board may attach to any permit such condi-
tions as it may deem appropriate, including any conditions concerning method
and time of operation, target and operation areas, safety precautions and record
keeping. The Operations Manual for Hail Decrease and Precipitation increase
is hereby made a condition of all permits issued and all permits shall be
subject thereto. Violation of any permit or any permit condition may result
in permit revocation or suspension or other appropriate enforcement action by
the Board.
696
06.300 Permit expiration : AM permits shall expire in accordance with Section
2-07-04 of the Act and shall not be renewable.
R2-07-07 PERMITS — SUSPENSION, REVOCATION, MODIFICATION AND RESTORATION
07.100 Suspension, Revocation, Modification : The Board may suspend, revoke,
or modify any permit or any provision or condition of a permit if it appears
to the Board that the permittee no longer has the qualifications necessary for the
issuance of an original permit or has violated any provisions of the Act, the
terms or conditions of any permit, or any of these regulations. Any provisions
or conditions of a permit may be revised in accordance with the provisions of
Section 2-07-04.2 of the Act.
07.200 Automatic Suspension of Permit : Any permit issued to any person
under these regulations shall be suspended automatically if such person's weather
modifcation license expires or is suspended, revoked or not renewed by the
Board. Automatic suspension shall result in the case of a permit issued to a
corporation, partnership, or other business association, if the natural person
designated as being in control of the operation in such business association's
application for a weather modification license becomes incapacitated, leaves his
employment, or is in any way unable to continue in control of the operation. A
I>ermit of a business association suspended under such circumstances may be
reinstated by the nomination of replacement personnel in accordance with
Section 03.100 of these regulations.
07.300 Restoration of Permit : At any time after the suspension, revocation
or modification of a permit the Board may restore it to the permittee, or delete
any modification thereof, upon a finding that the requirements for issuance of
an original permit have been met by the permittee, or that the conditoins requir-
ing modification no longer exist.
R2-0 7-08 PROOF OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Proof of financial responsibility is made by showing to the satisfaction of the
Board that the permittee has the ability to respond in damages to liability which
might reasonably result from the operation for which the permit is sought.
Such proof of financial responsibility may be shown by :
08.100 Presentation to the Board of, or proof of purchase of. a prepaid non-
cancellable insurance policy or a corporate surety bond issued by a company
against whom service of legal process may be made in North Dakota against
such liabilities in an amount five times the value of an operation conducted
under contract or in an amount five times the estimated costs of an operation
not conducted under contract ; or
08.200 Depositing with the Board cash or negotiable securities in an amount
five times the value of an operation conducted under contract or in an amount
five times the estimated costs of an operation not conducted under contract.
08.300 Any other manner approved by the Board.
R2-07-09 RECORD KEEPING AND REPORTS
09.100 Records :
09.101 Daily Log : Each permittee shall fill in and retain a daily log of weather
modification activities for each unit of weather modification apparatus used
during an operation. Such log shall include a record of the following information
for each day of weather modification operations.
( 1 ) Date of the weather modification activity ;
(2) Each aircraft flight track and location of each radar unit during each
modification mission. Maps may be used ;
(3) Local time when modification activity began and ended. For inter-
mittent operations, the beginning and ending time of the total sequence are
acceptable ;
(4) Duration of operation of each unit of weather modificaiton apparatus,
in hours and minutes ;
(5) Description of type of modification agent(s) used;
(6) Rate of dispersal of agent during the period of actual operation of
weather modification apparatus, by hour cr other appropirate time period;
(7) Total amount of modification agent used. If more than one agent was
UMd, rejK)rt total for each type separately ;
(8) Local time when any radar monitoring operations were turned on and
turned off ;
697
(9) Type of clouds modified; that is, whether they were stratiform, iso-
lated cuniuliform. organized cumuliform or other types of clouds ;
(10) Remarks indicating such operational problem as equipment failure,
weather conditions not conducive to successful performance of the operation,
personnel problems and the like.
09.102 Monthly Totals : Monthly Totals shall be kept on the basis of the daily
logs, listing the total :
(1) Days during month in which operation conducted ;
(2) Time of operation ;
(3) Amount of each kind of agent used ;
(4) Average rate of dispersal of each kind of agent used ;
(5) Days of each type of cloud treated ; and
(6) Duration of operation of each unit of weather modification apparatus,
in hours and minutes.
09.103 Weather Records
Each permittee shall obtain and retain copies of all daily precipitation total
records available from the National Weather Service stations for the target
area.
09.104 Addresses of Participants
Each permittee must keep a roster of the names and North Dakota addresses of
all employees participating in the state on an operation for which a permit has
been issued.
09.105 Inspection
Duly authorized agents of the Board shall have the authority to enter and in-
spect, any equipment and to inspect any records required by this regulation and
to make copies thereof.
09.106 Exempted Weather Modification Activities
All persons conducting weather modification activities exempted by the Board
under the provisions of Section 2-07-03.1 of the Act shall record and maintain
all of the records required of any permittee by this regulation.
09.200 Reports :
09.201 Monthly : Within ten days after the conclusion of each calendar month,
■ each permittee shall submit a written report to the Board which shall include :
(1 ) A copy of the summary record prepared under 09.102 ;
(2) A copy of the roster of the names and North Dakota addresses of all
employees participating in state operations which were prepared under
09.104 ;
(3) A copy, of the federal interim activity report form filed for that month
with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in accordance
with the rules adopted under the authority of Public Law 92-205 ; and
(4) A narrative account of the manner in which operations during the
month did not conform to the operational plan filed in accordance with
00.101(15).
09.202 Final : Within thirty days after final completion of any operation, each
permittee shall file with the Board a final report on the operation which shall
include :
(1) Copies of the logs prepared in accordance with 09.101, copies of the
weather records obtained in accordance with 09.103 and, copies of the totals
for the entire operational period from the monthly summary records pre-
pared under 09.102 ;
(2) A copy of the federal final activity report form filed with the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in accordance with the rules
adopted under the authority of Public Law 92-205 ; and
(3) A narrative account of the manner in which the operation did not
confirm to the operational plan filed in accordance with 05.101(15).
09.203 Evaluation : Within sixty days after completion of any operation for
which a permit was issued, each permittee shall file with the Board a narrative
evaluation of the operation. The data for this report shall be assembled and
evaluated in accordance with the evaluation plan prepared in compliance with
05.101(16).
09.204 Exempted Weather Modification Activities : The Board may, in its
discretion, require persons operating weather modification activities exempted
under R2-07-02 but who have been required to keep records pursuant to this
regulation, to file all or any part of such records with the Board.
698
R2-07-10 BIDDING AND AWARD OF CONTRACTS
10.100 Bid Procedure :
10.101 Advertisement and Reauest for Bid: (1^ In all cases where the Board
shall undertake to contract for services, supplies, or materials, the estimated
cost of which shall exceed $10,000 for any one contract, the Board shall advertise
for bids for such services, supplies, or materials. Such advertisement shall he
placed for three consecutive weeks in the official newspaper of the county in
which the Board's offices are located and in at least one official newspaper in
general circulation in the state. In the case of contracts for weather modifica-
tion operations, such advertisement shall also be placed in some trade publica-
tion of general circulation among those groups most likely to bid on the contract.
The advertisement shall state :
(a) That any prospective bidders may secure such contract specifications
and requirements as may be available by applying in writing to the offices
of the Board.
(b) The place where and the day and hour when the bids will be opened ;
(c) That the right of the Board to reject any and all bids is reserved ;
(d) Each bid shall be accompanied by a bidder's bond in a sum equal to
five percent of the full amount of the bid, executed by the bidder as principal
and by a surety company authorized to do business within this state, con-
ditioned that if the bid be accepted and the contract awarded to him, he,
within ten days notice of award, will execute and effect a contract in ac-
cordance with the terms of his bid and a contractor's bond in the manner
specified by subsection 10.204.
(e) No bid will be read or considered which does not fully comply with
the above provisions concerning bonding and no contract will be awarded
to any person who has not complied with any applicable licensing require-
ments of the Board.
(2) In the case of contracts for weather modification operations, the Board
may, in addition to the requirements of subsection 10.101(1), prepare a request
for bid in which it shall describe the minimum requirements for aircraft, radar,
communications and other equipment, operational and such other requirements as
it may deem necessary. Such request for bid shall include those items of informa-
tion specified in subdivisions (b) through (e) of subsection 10.101(1). The re-
quest may be sent by the Board to those persons having a recognized interest in
operations contracts.
10.102 Opening of Bids: At the time and place designated in the request for
bids, the Board shall conduct a public hearing at which it shall open all bids
received. After opening each bid, the Board shall determine whether such bid
meets the minimum requirements set forth in the Act, these regulations, and
the request for bid, and then read aloud each bid meeting such minimum re-
quirements. Bids which do not meet such minimum requirements shall not be read
or considered.
10.200 Award of contracts :
10.201 Deviation from technical requirements : Any or all bids may be rejected
by the Board on the basis of technical inadequacy or other failure to comply with
the specifications included in the request for bids. Bids which are technically
adequate but which show price quotations beyond the budget restrictions may be
negotiated with the Director for reduction in equipment and/or services either
required by, or bid over and above the requirements of, the request for bid. All
such negotiations shall be conducted at the discretion of the Board.
10.202 Point scoring system to be used : Bidders for weather modification op-
eration contracts shall be evaluated on the basis of the amount of the bid sub-
mitted and a system of points allotted to each bidder for evaluation criteria estab-
lished by the Board. Sole authority for establishment of point values and scoring
shall rest with the Director. Point scores assigned shall be final and non-nego-
tiable. Previous experience and performance shall be a criteria to be considered
in scoring each bidder. The bidder scoring the lowest cost per point shall be
awarded the contracts in accordance with subsection 10.203.
10.203 Low bid-preference for North Dakota bidders: In awarding any con-
tract, tlx- Board shall award it to the lowest and best bidder, and shall, if all
other factors are equal, give that preference for North Dakota bidders estab-
lisbed by Section 44-0S-01 of the North Dakota Century Code.
10.204 Contractor's bond : Before the Board shall award any contract, it shall
require the Contractor to furnish a surety bond for the faithful performance of the
699
contract in the amount of twenty-five percent of the contract price, conditioned
that the contractor and his agents will, in all respects, faithfully perform all
weather modification contracts undertaken with the Board and will comply
with all provisions of the Act, these regulations, and the contract entered into
by the Board and the contractor.
Rules of Practice and Procedure Before the North Dakota Weather
Modification Board
r2s-3 2-01 general provisions
01.100 Scope : The provisions of these regulations shall apply to all hearings
held by the Board for the purposes of adjudicating the rights of parties under
Chapter 2-07 of the North Dakota Century Code. These regulations shall provide
procedures in addition to or in explanation of those procedures provided by such
chapter and Chapter 28-32.
01.200 Liberal Construction : These regulations shall be liberally construed in
order to secure just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of the issues
presented.
01.300 Suspension of Rules : The Board or any hearing officer shall have the
right, upon either its own motion or the motion of any party, to suspend the
operation and effect of these regulations or any portion thereof, whenever the
public interest or the interests of any party to a proceeding shall not be sub-
stantially prejudiced by such suspension.
01.400 Definitions: As used in these regulations, the following words shall
have the meaning given to them below, unless otherwise made inappropriate by
context.
01.401 "Board" shall mean the North Dakota Weather Modification Board.
01.402 "Hearing Officer" or "Officer" shall mean the person appointed by the
Board to call and conduct a hearing.
01.403 "License" means a professional weather modification license issued
under the provisions of Chapter 2-07.
01.404 "Order" shall mean any written command or direction made by the
Board as provided by law.
01.405 "Person" shall mean any real person, county, municipality or other
political subdivision, department, agency or commission, any public or private
corporation, any partnership, asociation or other organization, any receiver,
trustee, assignee, or other legal entity, other than a court of lawT, or other legal
representative of the foregoing but does not include the Board.
01.406 "Permit" means a weather modification permit issued under the provi-
sions of Chapter 2-07.
01.500 Case Numbers and Title : Each matter coming formally before the
Board for hearing will be known as a case and shall be given a docket number and
title, descriptive of the subject matter. Such number and title shall be used on all
papers in the case, and as far as possible, any communication to the Board in any
particular case shall bear the number of said case.
01.600 Personal Appearances : Participants may appear in any proceeding in
person or by an attorney or other representative qualified under Section 01.703.
An individual may appear in his own behalf, a member of a partnership may
represent the partnership, a bona fide officer or duly authorized employee of a
corporation, association or group, and an officer or employee of a state agency, of
a department or political subdivision of the state or other governmental authority,
may represent the state agency or the department or the political subdivision of
the state or other governmental authority in any proceeding.
01.700 Practice Before the Board :
01.701 Person in own interest : Any person may appear before the Board in his
own right if he has a bona fide interest in the subject matter of the proceeding.
01.702 Attorneys : Attorneys at law who are admitted to practice before the
courts of the state of North Dakota may represent any party to a proceeding.
Any member of the bar of another state may be permitted by the Board to appear
in and conduct a case or proceeding while retaining his residence in another state.
01.703 Other Persons : Any other person who shall file proof to the satisfaction
of the Board that he is possessed of necessary legal or technical qualifications to
enable him to render valuable service may be permitted to practice before the
Board.
700
01.704 Rules of Conduct : All persons appearing before the Board must conform
to the standards of ethical conduct required of practitioners before the courts of
the state of North Dakota.
01.800 Parties :
01.801 Parties : Any person whose legal rights, duties, or privileges may be de-
termined in the case for which the hearing may be held shall be a party. When
a hearing is held pursuant to a request for a hearing, the person making the
request shall be a party. The Board shall be a party in any action to enforce any
regulation, statute, permit, condition, or order of the Board. Any person who
has properly intervened in a case shall be a party.
01.802 Petitioner : Any person seeking reconsideration, as provided by law, of
any administrative action taken pursuant to law and these regulations, shall be
styled the petitioner.
01.803 Respondent : Any person against whom any complaint is filed or order
issued under these regulations shall be styled the respondent.
01.804 Intervenor : Persons petitioning to intervene when admitted as a partici-
pant to a proceeding shall be styled intervenors. Admission as an intervenor shall
not be construed as recognition by the Board that such intervenor might be
aggrieved by any order of the Board in such proceeding.
01.805 Complainant : Persons who complain of any act or omission in violation
of any statute, regulation or permit of the Board shall be styled complainants.
01.900 Investigation Upon the Board's Own Motion : The Board may at any
time, upon its own motion, or upon the complaint of any person, institute investi-
gations and order hearings in any thing done by any person which the Board may
believe is in violation of the law or any order, regulation or permit of the Board.
The Board may secure and present such evidence as it may consider necessary
or desirable in any proceeding in addition to the evidence presented by any
other party-
01.1000 Computation of Time :
01.1001 In determining the day upon which an answer must be served pursuant
to Section 28-32-05, the day of the hearing and the last day upon which an answer
may properly be received shall not be included in computing the required three-
day time period. If the day upon which the answer is due falls on a Saturday,
Sunday, or legal holiday, the answer shall be due on the preceding business day.
01.1002 In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by these rules,
other than that time period set out in subsection 01.1001, the day of the act,
event, or default after which the designated period of time begins to run is not
to be included. The last day of the period so computed is to be included, unless
it is a Sunday or legal holiday, in which event the period runs until the end of
the next day which is neither a Sunday nor a holiday. When the period of time
prescribed or allowed is less than seven days, intermediate Sundays and holidays
shall be excluded in the computation.
01.1100 Service: For the purposes of these Rules, service or filing shall be
deemed to have occurred upon actual receipt of the document served or filed.
01.1200 Record : Unless any party demands otherwise at least ten days prior to
the date of hearing, a written summary record or tape recording of the proceeding
will be made and filed. If demanded, the Board shall cause a verbatim transcript
to any proceedings to be made at the expense of the demanding parties. The time
period required herein shall be computed, as nearly as practicable, by that
method specified in Section 01.1001.
R2 8-3 2-0 2 PLEADINGS
02.100 Informal Complaint : Informal complaints may be made orally or in
writing addressed to the Board. Letters of complaint to the Board will be con-
sidered as informal complaints. Matters thus presented will be handled by corre-
spondence or by other informal communications, or by conference with the party
or parties complained of, or by formal investigation instituted by the Board upon
its own motion, or in such other manner as the Board shall deem to be appropriate
and warranted by the facts and the nature of the complaint in an endeavor to
bring about satisfaction of the complaint without formal hearing.
02.200 Formal Complaints :
02.201 Complaints shall be made by the Board on its own motion by complaint
in writing, setting forth any act or tiling done or omitted to be done in violation
or claimed to be violation of any provision of law or of any order, rule, regula-
tion, or permit of the Board.
701
02.202 Each formal complaint shall show the venue, "Before the North Dakota
Board of Weather Modification" and shall contain a heading, "In the Matter of",
showing the name and address of the respondent. The complaint shall be so drawn
as to fully and completely advise the respondent or the Board of the facts con-
stituting the ground of the complaint ; the provisions of the statutes, regulations,
orders, or permit relied upon ; the injury complained of ; and shall contain a
clear, concise statement of the relief sought.
02.203 The Board shall serve a true copy of the complaint and notice for hear-
ing upon the respondent personally, or by registered or certified mail, as the
Board may direct, in such time as provided by law before the time specified for
hearing thereof unless the service of such complaint or notice of hearing is
waived, in writing, by the respondent, or unless the parties agree upon a definite
time and place for hearing thereof with the consent of the Board ; provided, how-
ever, that in case of an emergency, the Board shall notice a proceeding for
hearing upon its merits as provided by law.
02.300 Order to Show Cause :
02.301 The Board may, by order, compel any person who it believes is violating
any law, regulation, or order of the Board subject to enforcement by these regula-
tions, or any person who has been granted a permit, to show cause why such law,
regulation or order should not be enforced against such person or why such permit
should not be suspended, revoked or modified, either in whole or in part.
02.302 An order to show cause shall specifically advise the respondent of the
facts of the violation and law applicable thereto and of the time and place of the
hearing to be conducted on the order.
02.303 If the Board finds that the respondent is committing or is about to com-
mit an alleged violation, it may order the respondent to cease and desist from
the acts constituting the violation. The Board may also, or in lieu thereof, enter
any other just and reasonable order.
02.400 Petition for Hearing : Any petitioner requesting the Board to review by
hearing, as provided by law, any Board action, rule, or regulation, shall file with
the Board a petition, which may be in letter form, advising the Board of the facts
constituting the grounds for the petition, the injury complained of and a clear
and concise statement of the relief sought.
02.500 Answers:
02.501 Each answer filed with the Board shall be designated as an "answer"
shall contain the correct title of the proceeding, and a specific denial of such ma-
terial allegations of the complaint as are controverted by the respondent and also
a statement of any new matter which may constitute a defense. If the answering
party has no information or belief upon the subject sufficient to enable him to an-
swer an allegation of the complaint, he may so state in his answer and place his
denial upon that ground. The filing of an answer will not be deemed an admission
of the sufficiency of the complaint.
02.502 An answer must be signed and verified by the respondent filing the same.
02.503 Two true and correct copies of the answer shall be served upon the Board
personally or by registered mail, at least three days before the time specified in
the complaint for hearing.
02.600 Response to Petition for Hearing :
02.601 Upon receiving a petition for hearing upon any matter, as provided by
law, the Board shall, within thirty (30) days of such receipt, serve upon the
petitioner, a response to the petition. Such response may be in letter form and
shall state the decision of the Board whether or not to hold the requested hearing.
If a hearing is granted, the response shall state the date upon which the petition-
ing party may appear to be heard, and such other conditions of the hearing as the
Board may determine. If the requested hearing is denied, the reasons for such
denial shall be clearly stated. This subsection shall not apply to hearings on
emergency orders.
02.602 Upon receiving a petition for hearing pursuant to an emergency order,
as provided by law, the Board shall set a date for hearing to be held within ten
(10) days of receipt of such petition and shall notify the petitioner of such date
and of such other conditions of the hearing as the Board shall determine.
02.700 Intervention : In any formal proceeding, any person having a substan-
tial interest in the subject matter of such proceeding may petition for leave to
intervene in such proceeding and may become a party thereto upon compliance
with the provisions of this rule. In general, such petitions will not be granted
unless it shall be found that such person has a statutory right to be made a party
to such proceedings or that such person has a property, financial, or other legally-
34-857 O - 79 - 47
702
recognizable interest which may not be adequately represented by existing parties,
and such intervention would not unduly broaden the issues or delay the pro-
ceeding.
02.701 A petition for leave to intervene shall be in writing, unless made at the
commencement of a hearing, and must set forth the grounds of the proposed inter-
vention, the position and interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and whether
the petitioner's position is in support of or in opposition to the relief sought.
02.702 A written petition for leave to intervene in any proceeding may be filed
prior to or at the commencement of the hearing, but not after commencement,
except for good cause shown.
02.703. The petitioner shall furnish a copy of any written petition to each party
to the proceeding, including the Board.
02.704 Admission as an inter venor shall not be construed as recognition by the
Board that such intervenor might be aggrieved by any act of the Board in such
proceeding.
02.800 Amendments : The Board, prior to any hearing, or the hearing officer dur-
ing any hearing, may, after notice to the other parties to a proceeding, allow any
pleading to be amended or corrected or any omission therein to be supplied,
provided that if any such amendment, when allowed, so alters or broadens the
issues that it appears proper, the Board may permit any party affected thereby a
reasonable time to prepare to meet the changed issues.
02.900 Withdrawal of Pleading : A party desiring to withdraw a pleading file
with the Board may file a notice of withdrawal thereof with the Board. Such
notice shall set forth the reason for the withdrawal. A copy of such withdrawal
notice must be served upon all other parties to the proceeding and a certificate
of service to that effect filed with the notice of withdrawal. Withdrawal of any
pleading in any proceeding in which a hearing has been held or convened shall
not be allowed without express permission of the Board.
02.1000 Motions : After a complaint or petition has been served, a request may
be made by motion for any procedural or interlocutory ruling or relief proper and
desired. All motions not made in the course of a hearing shall be in writing and
shall be served on the other parties to the hearing by the moving party.
02.1001 The Board, prior or subsequent to any hearing, or the hearing officer
during any hearing, may set any motion for oral argument.
02.1002 The hearing officer designated to preside at a hearing is authorized to
rule upon any motion not formally acted upon by the Board prior to the commence-
ment of the hearing, wherein the immediate ruling is essential in order to proceed
with the hearing and upon any motion filed and made after the commencement
thereof and prior to the decision in the proceedings ; provided, however, that no
motion made before or during a hearing, a ruling upon which would involve or
constitute a final determination of the proceeding, shall be ruled upon by an
examiner.
02.1003 Motions not ruled upon by the examiner shall be ruled upon by the
Hoard.
02.1004 Appeals from rulings of the examiner on any motion may be takei. as
provided in 04.600.
R28-3 2-03 PRE-HEARING MATTERS
03.100 Informal Disposition : Informal disposition may be made of any case, or
any issue therein, by stipulation, or consent order at any point therein, subject to
the approval of such informal disposition, or any terms thereof, by the Board.
03.200 Prehearing Conference : A prehearing conference may be held at any time
at the discretion of the Board or hearing officer prior to any hearing. The prehear-
ing conference shall be an informal proceeding conducted fairly and expeditiously
by the hearing officer, for purposes of identifying and simplifying the issues
to be determined, identifying and limiting the number of witnesses, and reaching
an agreement on any or all issues of law or fact without the necessity for further
hearing thereon. In addition to any offer of settlement, the following are appro-
priate for consideration at a prehearing conference :
(1) The simplification of issues ;
(2 ) The necessity or desirability of amendment to the pleadings ;
(3) The exchange and acceptance of service of exhibits proposed to be
offered in evidence;
(4) The obtaining of admission as to. or stipulations of, facts not remaining
in dispute, or the authenticity of documents which may properly shorten the
hearing ;
703
(5) The limitation of the number of witnesses ; and
(6) Such other matters as may properly be dealt with to aid in expediting
the orderly conduct of the proceeding.
03.300 Conference Results Stipulated : Upon conclusion of prehearing confer-
ence, the parties shall immediately reduce the results thereof to the form of a
written stipulation which recites the matters agreed upon, which stipulation
shall be filed with the Board. Any such stipulation may be received in evidence
at a hearing and, when so received, shall be binding on the parties with respect
to the matters therein stipulated.
03.400 Consolidation : The Board, upon its own motion, or upon motion by any
party, may order two or more proceedings involving a similar question of law or
facts to be consolidated for hearing where rights of the parties or the public
interest will not be prejudiced by such procedure.
R2 8-3 2-04 HEARINGS
04.100 Hearing Officers:
04.101 Appointment : All hearing officers shall be appointed by the Board. The
Board shall appoint a hearing officer within five (5) days of service of a com-
plaint or petition. Notification of the appointment shall be made to all parties in
such manner as the Board may determine.
04.102 Qualification :
(1) All appointments hereunder shall be consistent with the purpose of
obtaining objectivity and impartiality in making decisions.
(2) The hearing officer may be an employee or a member of the Board.
The Board may appoint as hearing officer a person who is not an employee
or member of the Board. In such event, the hearing officer shall be an attorney
at law licensed to practice in the State of North Dakota, unless some other
person is agreed upon by all parties ; provided that such hearing officer shall
be considered an employee of the Board for the sole purpose of compensation,
if any. and authorization to conduct the hearing and recommend findings
of fact and a decision to the Board. In all other respects, he shall be inde-
pendent of the Board.
(3) In all cases, the Board retains discretion to conduct the hearing itself,
in which case an employee of the Board shall be the hearing officer.
04.103 Authority : The appointment of the hearing officer shall, to the extent
permitted by law, authorize and direct the hearing officer to conduct the hearing
and recommend a decision to the Board. When evidence is to be taken in a pro-
ceeding, one or more of examiners, when duly designated for that purpose, shall
preside at the hearing. An officer duly designated by the Board to preside at a
hearing shall have the authority to take any of the following actions in the name
of the Board.
(1) To regulate the course of hearing ;
(2) To administer oath ;
(3) To issue subpoenas ;
(4) To take depositions or cause same to be taken ;
(5) To rule upon offers of proof and to receive eivdence ;
(6) To hold appropriate conferences before or during hearings ;
(7) To dispose of procedural matters but not to dispose of motions made
during hearings to dismiss proceedings or other motion which involves a final
determination of proceedings ;
(8) To exclude evidence which is cumulative or repetitious ;
(9) To authorize any party to furnish and serve designated late-filed ex-
hibits within a specified time after the close of the hearing;
(10) To order discovery ;
(11) Within their discretion, or upon direction of the Board, to certify
any question to the Board for its consideration and disposition ; and
(12) To take any other action necessary or appropriate to discharge the
duties vested in them, consistent with statutory or other authorities under
which the Board functions and with the rules, regulations and policies of
the Board.
04.104 Limitations : Hearing officers shall perform no duties inconsistent with
their responsibilities as such. No officer shall in any proceeding for an adjudica-
tion required by statute to be determined on the record after opportunity for
hearing, consult any person or party on any fact in issue unless upon notice and
opportunity for all parties to participate.
04.105 Disqualification :
704
(1) Any party may tile a petition with the Board to disqualify any hearing
officer. The Board shall determine the petition in accordance with this sub-
section and enter its decision on the record.
(2) The Board may, for good cause, revoke the appointment of any hearing
officer upon the tiling of a petition of a party or upon the Board's own motion.
Any such revocation shall be effective upon notice to the officer.
(3) A hearing officer shall withdraw from participation in a hearing at any
time prior to the final determination if he deems himself disqualified for any
reason.
(4) Whenever a hearing officer withdraws or is disqualified, the Board shall
.appoint another in his place, without the need for such newly appointed officer
hearing evidence already presented in the case.
04.200 Discovery:
04.201 Agency Discovery
(1) Information
Upon request of the Board or the hearing officer, any party to the matter shall
furnish to the Board or the hearing officer any information which the party
may have which is relevant to the matter under consideration.
(2) Examination of Records
Upon request of the Board or the hearing officer, any party shall allow the
Board or any member, employee, or agent of the Board, when authorized by it
or the hearing officer, or the officer himself, to examine and copy any books,
papers, records or memoranda pertaining to the matter under consideration.
(3) Inspection of Premises
Upon request of the Board or the hearing officer, any party shall allow the
Board or any member, employee, or agent of the Board when authorized by
it or the hearing officer, or the hearing officer himself, to enter upon any of
the party's property for the purpose of obtaining information, examining any
physical facility, or examining records or conducting surveys or investiga-
tions.
04.202 Discovery by Parties :
(1) Parties other than the Board may obtain discovery by examination of
those public records which are in possession of the hearing officer or the
Board. Any party to a case may request the Board or the hearing officer to
exercise its powers in subsection 04.201(1) to obtain public information or to
issue a subpoena as provided in 05.300. The Board or the hearing officer may
grant or deny such requests. A party may request voluntary disclosure of
information by any other party.
(2) The deposition of any witness or party required in any proceeding
before the Board may be taken in the same manner and on the same notice
as in an action pending in the district courts of this state. Any person whose
deposition is taken shall receive the same fees and mileage as a witness in
a civil case in the district courts and such costs shall be paid by the party
at whose insistence the deposition is taken.
(3) Interrogatories may be issued, in any proceeding before the Board, in
the same manner as in an action pending in tbe district courts of this state.
04.300 Appearance: Interested parties shall enter their appearances at the
beginning of tbe hearing by giving their name and address and briefly stating
whether they appear in support of the complaint or in opposition thereto, or
otherwise. All such appearances shall be noted on the record with a notation
in whose behalf each appearance is made. Included in such appearances shall be
the names of the members of the Board's staff participating in the hearing of in-
vestigation and the names of any other persons appearing for the Board.
04.400 Continuance : Before or after any hearing, continuances may be granted
by the Board for good and sufficient cause. A motion for such a continuance shall
l>e made in writing, filed with the Board, and served on opposing counsel or parties.
Such motions shall be presented as far in advance of date fixed for hearing as pos-
sible to insure favorable action. The Board may affect a continuance before or
after any hearing upon its own motion. The hearing officer may grant oral or writ-
ten requests for continuances during any hearing.
04.500 Order of Procedure : In hearings on formal complaints and petitions,
fho complainant or petitioner, as the case may be, shall open and close. In hear-
ings on an older to show cause, the respondent shall open and close. When pro-
ceedings have been consolidated for hearing, the officer shall designate who shall
open and close. Intervenors shall follow the parties in whose behalf the interven-
tion is made; where the intervention is not in support of an original party, the
705
presiding officer shall designate at which stage such intervenor shall be heard. In
proceedings where the evidence is materially within the knowledge or control of
another party or participant, the foregoing order or presentation may be varied
by the officer.
04.600 Appeal to Board From Ruling of Hearing Officer — Offer of Proof : An
appeal may be taken to the Board from a ruling officer during the course of a
hearing only where extraordinary circumstances necessitate a prompt decision
by the Board to prevent detriment to the public interest.
Any offer of proof made in connection with an objection taken to any ruling
of the hearing officer rejecting or excluding proffered oral testimony shall consist
of a statement of the substance of the evidence which counsel contends would be
adduced by such testimony ; and, if the excluded evidence in documentary
or written form or reference to documents or records, a copy of such evidence
shall be marked for identification and shall constitute the offer of proof.
04.700 Oral Argument :
04.701 Before Officer : When, in the opinion of the hearing officer, time permits,
and the nature of the proceedings, the complexity or the importance of the issues
of fact or law involved, and the public interest warrant, such officer may, either on
on his own motion, or at the request of any party at or before the close of the taking
of testimony, allow and fix a time for the presentation of oral argument imposing
such limits of time on the argument as deemed appropriate. Such arguments
shall be transcribed and bound with -the transcript of testimony, if a transcript
is prepared.
04.702 Before Board : Request for authority to present oral argument before
the Board may be made at the time of any appeal taken during the hearing, at the
conclusion of the taking or evidence, or on brief, at such time as the Board may
allow. The Board will fix the time for oral argument, if allowed and notify the
parties.
04.800 Briefs, Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law :
04.801 Each party to any proceeding may file proposed findings of fact and
conclusions of law, briefs, or memoranda of law ; provided, however, that the
Board or hearing officer may direct any party to file proposed findings of fact and
conclusions of law, briefs, or memoranda of law.
04.802 The Board or hearing officer shall fix the time for the filing and service
of proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, briefs, or memoranda of law,
giving due regard to the nature of the proceeding, the magnitude of the record,
and the complexity or importance of the issues involved, and he shall fix the order
in which such documents shall be filed.
04.803 Should a party find that it is unable to meet the date for filing and
serving proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, briefs, or memoranda
of law, such party shall so notify the Board or hearing officer and the other
parties in writing, therein setting forth the reasons for such inability together
with a request for an extension of time to a date certain for filing and service.
04.804 When it is ordered that proposed findings of fact and conclusions of
law, briefs, or memoranda of law be filed and served by the party initiating the
proceeding, and where such party fails to file and serve by the date specified with-
out complying with 04.803 above, the Board on its own motion or the motion of
any party may, in its discretion, dismiss the proceeding. Such failure in the case
of an intervenor, protestant, or respondent may be deemed a waiver of the right
to participate further in the proceeding, and the Board on its own motion or the
motion of any party may so order.
04.805 Exhibits should not be reproduced in a brief, but may, if desired, be
reproduced in an appendix to the brief. Every brief of more than twenty pages
shall contain a subject index, with page references, and the pages where the
citations appear. All briefs shall be as concise as possible.
04.806 All briefs shall be accompanied by certificate showing service upon all
parties or their attorneys who appeared at the hearing. One copy of each brief
shall be furnished for the use of the Board unless otherwise directed by the Board
or hearing officer.
04.900 Decisions of the Board : In all cases in which more than one member
or employee of the Board shall act as hearing officer, only an odd number of
members or employees shall so act. In all cases in which any matter shall be
heard by more than one hearing officer, sitting jointly, and in all cases in which
the Board shall rule on any issue, motion, or objection, the decision of the Board
shall be determined by vote.
706
R2 8-3 2-0 5 EVIDENCE
05.100 Rules : The admissibility of evidence shall be determined generally in
accordance with the practice in the district courts of this state, except to the ex-
tent that these rules conflict therewith. However the Board or the hearing officer
may waive the usual common law or statutory rules of evidence where such waiver
is necessary to ascertain the substantial rights of the public and interested
parties. When objection is made to the admissibility of evidence, the hearing
officer shall receive such evidence subject to later ruling by the Board.
05.200 Witnesses : Witnesses will be orally examined under oath before the
Board or hearing officer. Testimony may also be taken by deposition as provided
in 04.202(2) hereof. Written testimony of any witness may be received when
properly supported by the oral testimony of its author.
05.300 Subpena : Subpenas for the attendance of witnesses or for the production
of documentary evidence, unless directed by the Board upon its own motion, will
issue only upon application in writing to the Board, or to the hearing officer,
except that during a hearing such application may be made orally on the record
before the hearing officer who shall have the authority to determine the relevancy
and the materiality of the evidence sought and to issue such subpoenas if war-
ranted. Written application shall specify the general relevance and materiality
of the testimony or documentary evidence sought, including, as to documentary
evidence, specifications as nearly as may be of the documents desired and the
facts to be proved by them. The cost of serving any subpoena shall be paid by
the party requesting it. Any witness who is subpoenaed under the provisions of
this rule and who appears at the hearing shall receive the same fees and mileage
as witnesses in the district courts of this state, and such cost will be paid by
the part at whose insistence the witness appears. No witness fees will be allowed
except on a subpoena.
05.400 Stipulations : The parties to any proceeding or investigation before the
Board may, by stipulation in writing, filed with the Board or orally entered in the
record, agree upon the facts, or any portion thereof involved in the controversy,
and any such stipulation may be received in evidence at a hearing and when
so received, shall be binding upon the parties with respect to the matters stipu-
lated therein.
05.500 Documentary Evidence :
05.501 Where relevant and material matter offered in evidence by any party is
embraced in a book, paper, or a document containing other matter not material
or relevant, the party must designate the matter so offered. If the other matter
is in such volume as wTould unnecessarily encumber the record, such book, paper
or document will not be received in evidence but may be marked for identifica-
tion and, if properly authenticated, the relevant and material matter may be
read into the record, or if the Board or hearing officer directs, a true copy of
such matter in proper form shall be received as an exhibit and like copies de-
livered by the party offering the same to all parties or their attorneys appearing
at the hearing who shall be afforded an opportunity to examine the entire book,
paper, or document and to offer in evidence in like manner any portions thereof
found to be material and relevant.
05.502 Any matter contained on a report or other official document on file with
the Board may be offered in evidence by merely identifying the report, document,
or other file containing the matter so offered.
05.600 Exhibits:
05.601 Exhibits must be on paper of good quality and so prepared as to be
plainly legible and durable whether printed, typewritten, mimeographed, photo-
graphed or otherwise, and if possible should be folded to a size not to exceed
8% by 14 inches. Whenever practicable, the sheets of each exhibit and line of
each sheet should be numbered, and if the exhibit consists of five or more sheets,
the first sheet or title page should contain a brief statement of what the exhibit
purports to Show with reference by sheet and line to illustrative or typical exam-
ple contained in the exhibit. Whenever practicable, documents produced by a
single witness shall he assembled and bound together suitably arranged and
Indexed so that they may he identified and offered as one exhibit. The source of all
material contained in any exhibit should he definitely shown.
05.602 Two copies of each exhibit will be furnished for the use of the Board
whenever it shall request; copies must also be available for all parties of record
in a proceeding
05.700 Official Notice : The Board or the examiner may take notice of any fact
or facts set forth in duly established regulations, annual reports, or any statisti-
707
cal data to which reference is made on the record at the hearing or any facts
which are judicially noticed by the courts of this state, as set forth in Section
31-10-02.
R2 8-3 2-0 6 REOPENING, REHEARING, REVIEW
06.100 Petition to Reopen : At any time after the conclusion of a hearing, but
before entry of the final order by the Board, any party to a proceeding may file
with the Board a petition to reopen the proceeding for the purpose of taking
additional evidence.
06.101 Such petition shall set forth clearly the facts claimed to constitute the
grounds requiring reopening of the proceeding, including the material changes of
fact or law alleged to have occurred since the conclusion of the hearing.
06.102 A copy of the petition to reopen shall be served by the petitioning party
upon all parties to the proceedings or their attorneys of record, and a certificate
to that effect will be attached to the petition when filed with the Board.
06.103 Within ten days following the service of any petition to reopen, any
other party to the proceeding may file with the Board his answer thereto. Any
party not filing such answer is in default thereof and shall be deemed to have
waived any objection to the granting of such petition.
If, after the hearing in a proceeding, either before or after the issuance of its
final order, or if no hearing has been held, only after the issuance of its final
order, the Board shall have reason to believe the conditions of fact or law have
so changed as to require, or that public interest requires, the reopening of such
proceeding, the Board may issue an order for the reopening of the same.
The Board shall act on any petition to reopen within ten days of receipt
thereof and may, in its discretion, hear oral argument on any such petition.
06.200 Petition for Rehearing :
06.201 A petition for rehearing of a proceeding must be filed within fifteen
days after a copy of the final order has been sent to the petitioning party by the
Board.
06.202 Such petition shall state concisely the alleged errors in the Board's de-
cision or order and the specific grounds relied upon by the petitioner. If an order
of the Board is sought to be vacated, reversed, or modified by reason of matters
that have arisen since the hearing and decision or order, or by reason of a conse-
quence that would result from the compliance therewith, the matters relied upon
by the petitioner shall be set forth in the petition.
06.203 A petition for rehearing shall be served by the petitioner upon all
parties to the proceeding or their attorneys of record.
06.204 Within ten days following the service of such petition, any party to the
proceeding may file with the Board his answer thereto. Any party not filing such
an answer is in default thereof and shall be deemed to have waived any objection
to the granting of such petition.
06.205 The Board shall act on any petition for rehearing within ten days of
receipt thereof and may, in its discretion, hear oral argument on such petition.
06.300 Appeal : Any party to a proceeding conducted pursuant to these rules or
other provisions of Chapter 28-32 shall have the right of appeal, in the manner
provided in Chapter 28-32, from any adverse ruling by the Board. Such appeal
shall not be a trial de novo but shall be limited to the hearing record and to those
issues specified in Section 28-32-19.
Utah
State of Utah, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water
Resources Rules, Regulations, and Procedures
cloud seeding resolution
Whereas, the Utah Cloud Seeding Act of 1973, Laws of Utah, Chapter 193,
authorizes the Utah Division of Water Resources to adopt such rules and regula-
tions as are necessary in the performance of its powers and duties pursuant to
the Cloud Seeding to Increase Precipitation Act and
Whereas, after careful deliberation and extensive study, the Utah Division of
Water Resources has prepared such rules and regulations and has circulated
same so far as practical to interested governmental bodies, groups, and indi-
viduals for their information and comments ; and
Whereas, the Utah Division of Water Resources has considered and deliberated
on the form and content of each proposed rule in the light of any and all sugges-
tions from its staff, and other interested persons ; and
708
Whereas, the Utah Board of Water Resources at its regular meeting on Septem-
ber 26, 1973, considered the proposed Rules and Regulations Relating to Cloud
Seeding Activities ; Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Utah Division of Water Resources adopt the following
Rules and Regulations relating to the Utah Cloud Seeding Act of 1973 on an
interim basis, until such time as experience shows that the Rules should be
modified.
I hereby certify that the above Resolution was adopted by the Utah Division
of Water Resources on September 26, 1973.
Daniel F. Lawrence,
Director, Utah Division of Water Resources.
Definitions
1. "Act" or "Cloud Seeding Act" means the 1973 Cloud Seeding To Increase
Precipitation Act, Laws of Utah, Chapter 193.
2. "Cloud Seeding" or "Weather Modification" means all acts undertaken to
artificially distribute or create nuclei in cloud masses for the purposes of altering
precipitation, cloud forms, or other meteorological parameters.
3. "Cloud Seeding Project" means a planned project to evaluate meteorological
conditions, perform cloud seeding, and evaluate results.
4. "Board" means the Utah Board of Water Resources, which is the policy
making body of the Utah Division of Water Resources.
5. "Director" means the Director of the Utah Division of Water Resources.
6. "Utah Division of Water Resources" means the Director and staff of the Utah
Division of Water Resources.
7. "License" means a certificate issued by the Utah Division of Water Resource??
certifying that the holder has met the minimum requirements in cloud seeding
technology set forth by the State of Utah, and is qualified to apply for a permit
for a cloud seeding project.
8. "Licensed Contractor" means a person or organization duly licensed for cloud
seeding activities in the State of Utah.
9. "Permit" means a certification of project approval to conduct a specific cloud
seeding project within the State under the conditions and within the limitations
required and established under the provision of these Rules.
10. "Sponsor" means the responsible individual or organization that enters into
an agreement with a licensed contractor to implement a cloud seeding project
Chapter I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Authority : The State of Utah through the Division of Water Resources shall
be the only entity, private or public, that shall have authority to authorize, spon-
sor, and/or develop cloud seeding research, evaluation, or implementation projects
to alter precipitation, cloud forms, or meteorological parameters within the State
of Utah.
2. Ownership of Water : All water derived as a result of cloud seeding shall be
considered as a part of Utah's basic water supply the same as all natural precipi-
tation water supplies have been heretofore, and all statutory provisions that
apply to water from natural precipitation shall also apply to water derived from
cloud seeding.
3. Notice to State Engineer : The Director of the Utah Division of Water Re-
sources shall, by written communication, notify the Director of the Utah Division
of Water Rights of any applications for cloud seeding permits within ten (10)
days of receiving such applications.
4. Consultation and Assistance : The Utah Division of Water Resources may
contract with the Utah Water Research Laboratory, or any other individual or
organization, for consultation and/or assistance in developing cloud seeding
projects or in furthering necessary research of cloud seeding or other factors
that may be affected by cloud seeding activities.
5. State and County Cooperation : The Utah Division of Water Resources shall
encourage, cooperate, and work with individual counties, multi-county districts
for planning and development, and groups of counties in the development of cloud
seeding projects and issuance of permits.
709
6. Statewide or Area wide Cloud Seeding Project : The State of Utah through
the Division of Water Resources reserves the right to develop Statewide or area-
wide cloud seeding programs where the Utah Division of Water Resources may
contract directly with licensed contractors to increase precipitation. The Utah
Division of Water Resources may also work with individual counties, multi-
county districts for planning and development, organizations or groups of coun-
ties, or private organizations, to develop Statewide or areawide cloud seeding
projects.
7. Liability :
(a) Trespass. — The mere dissemination of materials and substances into
the atmosphere or causing precipitation pursuant to an authorized cloud
seeding project, shall not give rise to any presumption that such use of the
atmosphere or lands constitutes trespass or involves an actionable or enjoin-
able public or private nuisance.
(b) Immunity. — Nothing in these Rules and Regulations shall be con-
strued to impose or accept any liability or responsibility on the part of the
State of Utah or any of its agencies, or any State officials or State employees
or cloud seeding authorities, for any weather modification activities of any
person or licensed contractor as defined in these Rules and Regulations as
provided by Laws of Utah, Chapter 63.
8. Rules:
(a) Purpose. — The Rules contained herein are adopted for the purpose of
ensuring both continued research and appropriate application of weather
modification technology to the needs of Utah, and for minimizing the danger
of weather modification activities to health and property, thus facilitating
administration and enforcement of the State of Utah Cloud Seeding Act of
1973, Laws of Utah, Chapter 193.
(&) Use and Limitation. — These Rules are prescribed for the performance
of the statutory powers and functions vested in the Utah Division of Water
Resources. In no event shall any Rule, or Ru^s, be construed as a limitation
or restriction upon the exercise of any statutory power of the Utah Division
of Water Resources.
(c) Suspension and Waiver of Rules. — The Utah Division of Water Re-
sources may suspend or waive a Rule, in whole or in part, upon a showing
of good cause ; or when, in the discretion of the Utah Division of Water
Resources, the particular facts or circumstances render such suspension or
waiver of the Rule appropriate.
(d) Amending of Rules. — These Rules may be amended from time to time
and new Rules may be adopted by the Utah Division of Water Resources.
Chapter II
UTAH BOARD OF WATER RESOURCES
1. Review of License and Permit : The Board may review applications for
Licenses and Permits and submit recommendations to the Director for his con-
sideration for action on the applications.
2. Policy Recommendations: The Board may advise and make recommenda-
tions concerning legislation, policies, administration, research, and other matters
related to cloud seeding and weather modification activities to the Director and
technical staff of the Utah Division of Water Resources.
Chapter III
WEATHER MODIFICATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1. Creation of Weather Modification Advisory Committee : An advisory com-
mittee may be created by the Director of the Utah Division of Water Resources.
Members of this committee shall be appointed by the Director, and serve for a
period of time as determined by the Director.
2. Duties of Weather Modification Advisory Committee :
(a) Advise the Director and technical staff of the Utah Division of Water
Resources on application for licenses and permits ;
(b) Advise and make recommendations concerning legislation, policies,
administration, research, and other matters related to cloud seeding and
weather modification activities to the Director and technical staff of the
Utah Division of Water Resources.
710
Chapter IV
LICENSE AND PERMIT REQUIRED
1. License and Permit Required : It is unlawful for any person or organization,
not specifically exempted by law and these Rules, to act or perform services as a
weather modifier, without obtaining a license and permit as provided for in the
Cloud Seeding Act and these Rules.
2. To Whom License May Be Issued : Licenses to engage in activities for
weather modification and control shall be issued to applicants who meet the
requirements set out in the Act and Chapter V of these Rules. If the applicant
is an organization, these requirements shall be met by the individual or indi-
viduals who are to be in control and in charge of the applicant's weather modifi-
cation operations.
3. To Whom Permit May Be Issued : A permit may be issued to a licensed
contractor as prescribed in Chapter VI of these Rules.
4. License and Permit Not Required : Individuals and organizations engaging
in the following activities, and only the for owing activities, are exempt from
the license and permit requirements of these Rules :
(a) Research performed wholly within laboratory facilities;
(b) Cloud Seeding activities for the suppression of fog ;
(c) Fire fighting activities where water or chemical preparations are
applied directly to fires, without intent to modify the weather ;
(d) Frost and fog protective measures provided through the application
of water and/or heat by orchard heaters or similar devices, or by mixing
of the lower layers of the atmosphere by helicopters or other type of aircraft
where no chemical are dispensed into the atmosphere, other than normal
combustion by-products and engine exhaust ; and
(e) Inadvertent weather modification (such as emissions from industrial
stacks.)
5. Effective Period of License : Each license shall be issued for a period of one
(1) year. A licensee may renew an expired license in the manner prescribed by
these rules.
6. Effective Period of Permit : Each permit shall be issued for a period as
required by a proposed cloud seeding project, but not exceeding one (1) year.
Chapter V
PROCEDURES FOR ACQUISITION AND RENEWAL OF LICENSE
1. Application for License : In order to qualify for a cloud seeding license an
applicant must :
(a) Submit a properly completed application to the Utah Division of Water
Resources ; and
(b) Submit to the Utah Division of Water Resources evidence of (1) the
possession by the applicant of a baccalaureate or higher degree in meteor-
ology or related physical science or engineering and at least five years'
experience in the field of meteorology, or (2) such other training and ex-
perience as may be acceptable to the Utah Division of Water Resources as
indicative of sufficient competence in the field of meteorology to engage in
cloud seeding activities.
2. Renewal of License : A licensee may qualify for a renewal of a license by
submitting an application for renewal. In the case of an organization, the appli-
cation for renewal must state whether the personnel, on the basis of whose quali-
fications the original license was issued, continue to be in control and in charge
of the organization's cloud seeding operations ; or, if the organization has ac-
quired replacement personnel, that there has been a change in personnel. If the
organization has hired replacement personnel, the organization shall attach to
its application for renewal a statement setting forth the names and qualifica-
tions of said personnel. Licensee should file an application for renewal thirty
(30) days prior to the expiration date of his license.
Chapter VI
PROCEDURES FOR ACQUISITION OF PERMIT
1. Application for Permit : In order to qualify for receipt of a cloud seeding
permit a licensee must :
711
(a) Submit a properly completed letter of application to the Utah Division
of Water Resources, which shall include the name and qualifications of the
person or persons who will be in control of, and in charge of the operations
for the licensee. These qualifications shall comply with Chapter V Section B-l
of these Rules and Regulations ;
(b) Demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director his ability to respond
in damages for liability which might reasonably arise as a result of the ap-
plicant's proposed cloud seeding activities ;
(c) File a copy of the contract or proposed contract between the sponsor
and licensed contractor relating to the project ;
(d) Submit copies of all pamphlets and promotional material distributed
in connection with the project ;
(e) Submit the plan of operation for the project, including a map showing
locations of all equipment to be used as well as equipment descriptions ;
(f) Receive preliminary approval of the project from the Director before
proceeding with notices of intent described in Chapter VI, Item 1, (g) and
(h) of these Rules.
(g) File with the Utah Division of Water Resources and the Utah Division
of Water Rights a notice of intention for publication which sets forth at least
all of the following :
(1) the name and address of the applicant ;
(2) the date he received a proper cloud seeding license, and all dates of
renewal ;
(3) the nature and the object of the intended operations, aind the per-
son or organization on whose behalf it is to be conducted ;
(4) the specific area in which, and the approximate date and time
during which, the operation will be conducted ;
(5) the specific area which is intended to be affected by the operation ;
(6) the materials and methods to be used in conducting the operation ;
and
(7) a statement that persons interested in such permit application
should contact the Utah Division of Water Resources.
(h) File with the Utah Division of Water Resources, within fifteen (15)
days from the last date of the publication of notice, proof that the applicant
caused the notice of intention to be published at least once a week for three
(3) consecutive weeks in a newspaper having a general circulation within
each county in which the operation is to be conducted and in which the
affected area is located. Publication of notice shall not commence until the
applicant has received approval of the form and substance of the notice of
intention from the Director.
2. Issuance of a Permit : A permit shall not be issued prior to the expiration of
ten (10) days following the last date of publication of the notice of intent.
3. Description of Permit : A licensee shall comply with all the requirements set
out in his permit. A permit shall include the following :
(a) The effective period of the permit, which shall not exceed one year ;
(b) The location of the operation ;
(c) The method (s) which may be employed : and
(d) Other necessary terms, requirements, and conditions.
4. Authority to Amend a Permit : The Utah Division of Water Resources may
amend the terms of a permit after issuance thereof if the Utah Division of Water
Resources determines that it is in the public interest.
Chapter VII
REVOCATION AND SUSPENSION OF LICENSES AND PERMITS
1. Automatic suspension of a Permit : Any cloud seeding permit issued under the
terms of these Rules shall be suspended automatically if the licensee's cloud
seeding license should expire, or in the case of an organization being the licensee,
if the person listed on the application for the permit as being in control of. and in
charge of, operations for the licensee should become incapacitated, leave the em-
ployment of the licensee, or for any other reason be unable to continue to be in
control of, and in charge of, the operation in question ; and a replacement, ap-
proved by the Director, has not been obtained.
2. Reinstatement of Permit : A permit which is suspended under Chapter VII,
Item 1, may be, at the discretion of the Director, reinstated following renewal of
712
the expired license, or submission of an amended personnel statement nominating
a person whose qualifications for controlling and being in charge of the operation
are acceptable to the Director.
3. Director's Authority to Suspend or Revoke Licenses and Permits: The
Director may suspend or revoke any existing license or permit for the following
reasons :
(a) If the licensee no longer possesses the qualifications necessary for the
issuance of a license or permit ;
(b) If the licensee has violated any of the provisions of the Cloud Seeding
Act;
(c) If the licensee has violated any of the provisions of these Rules ; or
(d) If the licensee has violated any provisions of his license and/or permit.
Chapter VIII
RECORD KEEPING AND REPORTS
1. Information To Be Recorded : Any individual or organization conducting
weather modification operations in Utah shall keep and maintain a record of
each operation which he conducts. For the purposes of this Chapter, the daily
log required by Title 15, Chapter IX, Sub-Chapter A, Part 908, Section 908.8 (a),
Code of Federal Regulations, November 1, 1972, as amended, and the supplemental
information required by Sections 908.8 (b), (c), and (d) will be considered ade-
quate, provided that each applicant for a weather modification permit submit
with his application a list containing the name and post office address of each indi-
vidual who will participate or assist in the operation, and promptly report any
changes or additions to this list to the Utah Division of Water Resources.
2. Reports:
(a) Each individual and organization conducting weather modification
operations in Utah shall submit copies of the daily log and supplemental
information described in Chapter VIII, Item 1, for each month, to the Utah
Division of Water Resources by the last day of each succeeding month.
(b) Information copies of all other reports required by Title 15, Chapter
IX, Sub-Chapter A, Part. 908, Sections 908.5, 908.6, and 908.7, Code of Fed-
eral Regulations, shall be submitted to the Utah Division of Water Resources
as soon as practicable, but in no case later than the deadlines set by the Fed-
eral Regulation.
(c) Copies of all reports, publications, pamphlets, and evaluations made by
either the licensed contractor or sponsor regarding a cloud seeding project
must be submitted to the Utah Division of Water Resources at the time these
are made public.
(d) In relation to any evaluations made for cloud seeding effectiveness,
both the method of evaluation and the data used shall be submitted to the
Utah Division of Water Resources.
Chapter IX
SUSPENSION OF CLOUD SEEDING OPERATION
The policy in regard to suspension of seeding because of potential flood danger
due to excessive snowpack shall be as follows :
1 All watersheds in a designated cloud seeding target area shall be monitored
monthly by the Director of the Division of Water Resources.
2. When it is determined that any watershed in the designated cloud seeding
target area has reached a critical maximum value, a thorough investigation of
this watershed shall be conducted by the Division of Water Resources to deter-
mine if cloud seeding should be suspended.
Washington
713
FORM OF OKDLK AND TRANSMIT! M. HY ACiLNC'Y IIAVINf. SlNCl.L HtAl)
Stale of \\ jshincion
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY __
(agency name)
Administrate Order No. PE ">">-29
(ill. Elmer C. Voqel, djyujJLydi
the Department of Ecology,
jo pnmMiFJic ...>j .,j..ni m the Department. oi-Ecoiflgy^_j,dcey . Washington
repealing chapter 508-20 KPC (Weather Modification Rules) and adopting chapter
173-495 (Weather Modification) . This action is taken since chapter 509-20 KAC
is obsolete it. form and content. The new chapter is restructured in currently
approved format and contains definitive instructions lrclonenting the intent of
chapter 43.37 RCW — Weather Modification. Procedures for license and pormit
application are more clearly defined, exerrpt activities are brought into con-
sonance with chapter 43.37 FCW, and Proof of Financial Responsibility is defined.
(2) VI URN ATI W V I x< mil* 1i*r Adoption of I'crnuncnl Rulrx
Thix action ix lakes purxu.ini lo Notice No 7836 I tied with ihe v.mJc reviser on
J.0/27/77 v,uch
»hjll take elTo.1
X ssnajant lu RC»" U (14 040(2)
si j laicr dale, xuch dale being
12) Al.TKRNATIVK B. I x* unit for Adoption of » nK-r^nci Rulo
lind
an csscrfcsic] e»rxts jnd ih.ii the lurefteng urdcf >x ncccxx..re lor the prtNcn Hhw i«i ihc public health
gcncr.il »ell.irc and Ihji uthcrvasce oi the rcuuocnicnix of not ice .md .ippi.riunii » lo prexent *ic»x .in
nropuxvd aetiua »ouid be oaairarj to public interest A kiaicmcai o> ihc facl* conMiiuitna >uch emergency is
Such rulv> arc llnrcfure adufled ix cmcrgcnc* ryk> lu Lake effect upon lihn; mlh 'he code rcvixcr
(1| Pursu.mi in the rcuuircmcmx of RC VV U 04 1 1977 e l<> § Jl' lh.il "every apenc) xhjll inco'por.uc it
miiM xnccilic bill m n.* c.ixc iHhil .ill of Ihe following language ahtffAJIive* v. hen .idoptni£ or jmcndmj: rulex* 1 1 ■ 1 1
MMCSSCM (j). Ibl .ir III .ix aflprufWialcl
X (a) Th.x rule ix pr.i.m.le.iicd purxu.ini l.i R( VV 43 . 37
and ix intended lu adimnislr.ilivclt implement thai »i.uuie
lb) Thix rule ix promulgated purxujni lo Hi VV
which dircvt' ih.n ihc
latency]
hax aulhorii) lu mi pic men I ihc prmriMua* of
(mimic ..I Jxl .ir RC W cl.il.onl
|C| Thix ruk i» promulgncd under ihe general rule making .tuihoriti of Ihc
■agency I
at SjMhuh/cd in RC W
(4) The ■MfcliiBWd hereto dccl.trc-x ih.n he h..x complied »nh ihe provix„mx of ihc Open Public Meeting*. A. i
(chapter 42..W RCVVi i l,c AdmmiMralire ■•ruccilnrc Act (chapter 14 114 RCW) ..r ihc Higher I iluc.il
Adminixir.,1, vc I'roceclurc Act (eh.ipur MH II RAW I. .ix appropriate, .incl ihc Male Rcgixtcr Ad leh.ipier .14 UK
Kt V, |
(A) Ihix order after bong hrxi recorded in ihc mdef rcgiMCt "f ihix agci*c\ ix herewith transmuted lo ihc Code
Reviser fur bhnf piirxuant hi elwrMer 14 IM RCW jnd xh.ipicr I 12 WAC
714
Chapter 173-495 WAC
WEATHER MODIFICATION
WAC 173-495-010 Purpose. — The Department of Ecology, under the authority
vested in it by Chapter 43.37 RCW, is charged with responsibilities for the super-
vision and control of all weather modification activities within the state, and
representation by the state in all interstate contracts relating to weather modifica-
tion and control. This regulation provides the basic framework for carrying out
the state's responsibility for such a program through the establishment of license
and permit requirements and procedures, report requirements, and fee require-
ments. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all weather modification ac-
tivities in all parts of the state except as specifically exempted in this chapter
and or in chapter 43.37 RCW.
WAC 173-495-020 Definitions. — As used in these regulations unless the context
requires otherwise:
( 1 ) "Department" means the Department of Ecology.
( 2 i ' Operation" means the performance of weather modification and control
activities pursuant to a single contract entered into for the purpose of producing
or attempting to produce a certain modifying effect within one geographical
area over one continuing time interval not exceeding one (1) year; or in the
case of the performance of weather modification and control activities, individu-
ally or jointly, by a person or persons to be benefited and not undertaken pur-
suant to a contract, operation means the performance of weather modification
and control dtttivities entered into for the purpose of producing, or attempting
to produce, a certain modifying effect within one geographical area and one
continuing time interval not exceeding one (1) year.
(3) "Research and Development" means theoretical analysis, exploration and
experimentation, and the extension of investigative findings of theories of a
scientific or technical nature into practical application for experimental and
demonstration purposes, including the experimental production and testing of
models, devices, equipment, materials, and processing.
(4) "Weather Modification and Control" means changing or controlling, or
attempting to change or control by artificial methods the natural development
of any or all atmospheric cloud forms or precipitation forms which occur in the
troposphere.
WAC 178-495-030 Requirement for Licenses and Permits. — No person shall
engage in weather modification activities except under and in accordance with
a license and a permit issued by the department, unless specifically exempt from
this requirement in WAC 173-495-050.
WAC 173-495-040 Exempt Activities — Requirements of Those Exempted. — The
following weather modification and control activity shall be exempt from the
license requirement of RCW 43.37.100. the permit requirements of RCW 43.37.100,
and the liability requirements of RCW 43.37.190 :
(1) All research and experiments related to weather modification control con-
ducted within laboratories.
(2) Those weather modification operations designed to alleviate sudden, un-
ezpected, hazardous conditions which require expeditious localized action for:
(a) protection against fire
(b) prevention of frost
(c) dispersal of fog
(3) Field research and development by institutions of higher learning.
(4) Any person proposing to conduct weather modification and control activi-
ties as described in subsection (2) above shall make every reasonable effort
prior thereto to notify the Department of Ecology, headquarters offices in
Olympia, Washington, of the type of activity to be carried out. the person carry-
ing out the activity and the materials and technique of application to be used.
(5) Any person proposing to conduct weather modification and control activi-
ties as described in subsection (3) above shall provide a written description of
the proposed program, notice of actual operations ten (10) days prior to com
mencement. and quarterly reports of operations and status to the headquarters
office Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington.
WAC 11.', -.',.9.7 0>,~> Qualifications for License — Regular. — All applicants for a
weather modification license shall be certified professional members of the Amer-
ican Meteorological Society or possess the academic achievements and profes-
sional experience necessary to receive such certification. In cases where the
applicant is an organization, the individual or individuals who will be in control
715
and in charge of the weather modification and control activities shall be required
to meet the above standard.
WAC 173-459-050 Qualifications for License — Restricted License. — (1) A re-
stricted license may be issued to an applicant for such license when :
(a) the applicant's proposed weather modification activities are limited
solely to those designed to disperse fog over airports ; and
(b) the applicant will be fully advised of the pertinent weather informa-
tion by the meteorologist on duty during the carrying out of the airport fog
dispersal.
(2) Applicants for restricted licenses are not required to meet the qualifica-
tions otherwise imposed by WAC 173-495-040.
WAC 173-495-060 Procedures for Issuing License. —
(1) Any person or organization desiring to obtain a license or restricted li-
cense shall make an application to the Department of Ecology on the form
prescribed, listing name, business address, etc.
(2) The department may require additional information of the applicant to
determine competency in the field of meteorology. Such additional information
shall be requested of the applicant by certified mail, and shall be submitted in
writing.
(3) Prior to the issuance of any license, the applicant shall pay a fee of $100
to the State of Washington.
(4) The application shall be deemed received by the Department of Ecology
when received at the headquarters offices, Department of Ecology, Olympia,
Washington 985504.
WAC 173-495-065 Period of License.—
(1) Licenses issued pursuant to chapter 43.37 RCW and these regulations
shall be effective for a period of one (1) year, to terminate at the end of the
calendar year of issuance.
(2) No later than thirty (30) days prior to the end of the calendar year, the
licensee may request a renewal of the license. The department shall review said
license upon the payment of a renewal fee of $100 to the State of Washington.
(3) In the determination of whether or not to grant such renewal request,
the department shall consider, and the applicant shall provide, information as
to whether the facts and circumstances relied on in the issuance of the original
permit have changed or altered. If the department determines that the licensee
no longer meets the requirements of competency in the field of meteorology, the
department may refuse to renew said license.
WAC 173-495-070 Permits Requirements.—
(1) Each weather modification operation not specifically exempted by statute
or these regulations shall require a permit. A separate permit shall be issued for
each operation.
(2) A license holder desiring to conduct a weather modification operation shall
submit, an application for a permit to the Department of Ecology.
(3) The permit applicant must hold a valid weather modification license from
the State of Washington.
(4) The applicant shall publish notice of intention at least once a week for
three (3) consecutive weeks in a legal newspaper having general circulation
and published within any county in which the operation is to be conducted and
in which the affected area is located, or, if the operation is to be conducted in
more than one county or if the affected area is located in more than one county
or is located in a county other than the one in which the operation is to be
conducted, then in a legal newspaper having a general circulation and published
within each of such counties. In case there is no legal newspaper published
within the appropriate county, publication shall be made in a legal newspaper
having a general circulation within the county.
(5) Proof of publication of the notice of intention, made in the manner pro-
vided herein, shall be filed by the licensee with the department within fifteen
(15) days from the date of last publication of the notice.
(6) The notice of intention shall contain at least the following:
(a) the name and address of the licensee ;
(b) the nature and object of the intended operation and the person or
organization on whose behalf it. is to be conducted ;
(c) the area in which and the appropriate time during which the opera-
tion will be conducted ;
(d) the area which is intended to be affected by the operation;
(e) the materials and methods to be used in conducting the operation.
(7) The applicant shall furnish proof of financial responsibility, as described
in WAC 173-495-120 of this chapter.
716
(8) The applicant shall pay a permit fee of one and one-half percent (iy2%)
of the estimated cost of the operation. The estimated cost will be computed by the
department from evidence available to it.
(9) Prior to issuance of a permit the department shall make a determination
in writing that the weather modification and control activities proposed to be
conducted under authority of the permit have been determined to be for the
general welfare and public good.
(10) The department shall hold an open public hearing at its headquarters
office in Olympia prior to any such permit issuance.
WAC 173-495-080 Permittee's Report of Operations — Requirement. — The
permittee shall be required to maintain reports on all operations on a daily basis,
and submit twice a month (1st day and 15th day) to the Department of Ecology.
The semi-monthly reports shall include the following information :
(1) Number of days under contract.
(2) Number of days of operation and number of hours of each day, for all
stations operated.
(3 ) The consumption rate and name of seeding agent used.
(4) A brief summary statement evaluating the past fifteen (15) -day period
in regard to the seeding potential and experience.
(5) Location of operations.
(6) Name and mailing address of each individual, other than the licensee, par-
ticipating or assisting in the operation.
(7) A brief statement of projected plans for the coming fifteen (15) -day
period.
(8) In the event operations are unexpectedly terminated, a special report
covering that fraction of the half-month period of operation is required. All re-
ports must be post-marked not later than one (1) day after due date.
(9) All such records are public records which shall be open to public inspec-
tion.
WAC 173-495-100 Revocation, Suspension, Modification. —
(1) All permits authorized by RCW 43.37.110 shall contain the following pro-
visions : "The department may, if it appears that continuing operation under
this permit will cause immediate injury to persons or property, terminate or
otherwise modify the terms of this permit in order to alleviate an emergency
situation by giving notice to the permittee by telegram or other writing."
(2) All permits authorized by RCW 43.37.110 may be revoked, suspended, or
modified when the department has reason to believe that good cause exists and
that the revocation, suspension, or modification is required for the general wel-
fare and public good. Any such revocation, suspension, or modification shall not
be undertaken prior to written notice by certified mail to the permittee. Oppor-
tunity for comment by the permittee shall be allowed. Any final departmental
decision shall be in writing.
(3) In the event the applicant desires to appeal any permit revocation, modi-
fication, or suspension action by the department such appeal must be filed with
the Pollution Control Hearings Board in Olympia within thirty (30) days of
the department's action. An appeal does not constitute a stay.
WAC 173-495-120 Proof of Financial Responsibility. — A permit applicant
shall furnish proof of financial responsibility to the Department of Ecology by
one of the following :
(1) Copy of insurance policy or binder for the operator.
(2) A current balance sheet showing sufficient assets to demonstrate financial
responsibility.
(3) Bond for safe performance.
(4) Such other information as the applicant may provide the department, in
writing, if one of the alternate methods (l)-(3). above, is not feasible or avail-
able, provided the applicant explains the infeasibility or unavailability.
The following sections of WAC 508-20 are repealed :
508-20-020 Board will notify Washington State University and the county
agent when permit is issued.
508-20-030 Permittee's report of operations.
50.8-20-040 Board may modify or terminate permits.
508-20-050 Exempt activities.
508-20-060 Exempt activities— Olympic Mountains research project.
508-20-070 Qualifications of licensees— Restricted license, fog dispersal at
airports.
50^-20-080 Use of dry ice for fog dispersal over public airports.
Appendix N
Documents of the Weather Modification Association
Constitution and By-Laws of the Weather Modification Association 1
Article I. Name : The name of the organization shall be the Weather Modifi-
cation Association.
Article II. Purpose : The Association shall function as a non-profit organiza-
tion. Its intended purposes include, but are not necessarily limited to, the follow-
ing:
(a) Promotion. — Promoting research, development, and understanding weather
modification for beneficial uses.
(b) Standards of Conduct. — Encouraging and promoting the highest standards
of conduct including certification of individual members qualified to execute field
experiments or operations in weather modification.
(c) Information Center. — Serving as a clearinghouse and dissemination agent
for weather modification oriented literature and information.
(d) Policy Statements. — Assuming an active role and maintaining a strong
voice in the production and dissemination of policy statements concerning all
aspects of weather modification practice.
Article III. Membership: There shall be four (4) classes of membership in the
Association. Each class shall be afforded the privileges of membership as indi-
cated.
(a) Member. — Any person who subscribes to the statement of purposes of the
Association, upon payment of the prescribed annual dues (Ref Article IV), shall
be afforded the privileges of membership. Members shall receive all publications
of the Association, and shall have the right to vote in the business of the Asso-
ciation and to hold any office in the Association.
(b) Student Member. — Any person, engaged in a full-time program of study
leading to a degree in the atmospheric sciences, engineering or other subjects
related to the science of weather modification, and who subscribes to the state-
ment of purpose of the Association, upon payment of the prescribed annual dues
(Ref Article IV), shall be afforded the privileges of student membership. Student
members shall receive all publications of the Association but may not vote in the
business of, nor hold office in, the Association.
(c) Corporation Member. — Any organization with active programs in weather
modification, or with interests directly related to weather modification activities,
which subscribes to the statement of purposes of the association, upon payment
of the prescribed annual dues (Ref Article IV), shall be afforded the privileges
of corporate membership. Corporations members shall receive all publications
of the Association and may designate one (1) individual to act for the corpora-
tion in the affairs of the Association. The designated individual shall have the
same rights and privileges afforded members of the Association.
(d) Honorary Member. — Members, or former members, of the Association who
have made outstanding contributions to any aspect of weather modification may,
subject to the unanimous consent of the Executive Committee of the Association,
be nominated in the Association. Election shall be by simple majority vote of the
members present at any regular or special meeting. Honorary membership shall
be non-expiring for the life of the member. Members so elected shall be excused
from the payment of dues. They shall receive all publications of the Association
and enjoy the same privileges as members of the Association.
Article IV. Dues : All dues for the Association shall be paid on a calendar year
basis. Annual dues for the various categories of membership shall be set by vote
of the members present at the annual meeting, on the recommendation of the
Executive Committee (Ref Article VI).
1 From the Journal of Weather Modification, v. 9, No. 1, April 1977, p. 198-201.
(717)
34-857 O - 79 - 48
718
Article V. Certification of Members: Certification of individual members as
being qualified to execute field experiments or operations in weather modifica-
tion shall be based upon experience, knowledge, and character. Certification shall
be granted by the unanimous vote of a Certification Board which shall be com-
posed of three (3) Certified Members who shall be appointed by the President.
The members of the Certification Board shall each serve three (3) years on
staggered terms. Changes in procedure for certification of members shall be
made only after an affirmative majority vote of the Certified Members present
at any annual meeting.
Article VI. Administration : The administration of the Association shall be
vested in an Executive Committee which shall include the elected officers and
trustees of the Association as follows :
(a) President. — The President shall be responsible for the administration of
the Association. He shall appoint such committees as he deems necessary for the
successful accomplishment of the Association's aims. The President shall preside
at all meetings and shall be a member ex-officio of all committees.
(b) President-elect. — The President-elect shall succeed the President in office.
The President-elect shall preside over the administrative functions of the Asso-
ciation in the absence, or by direction, of the President.
(c) Secretary. — The Secretary shall be responsible for the minutes of each
meeting and shall notify the membership of impending meetings (Ref Article
VIII). In the absence of both the President and the President-elect, the Secretary
shall preside over the administrative functions of the Association.
(d) Treasurer. — The Treasurer shall conduct the financial affairs of the Asso-
ciation and keep accurate records thereof. The functions of Secretary and Treas-
urer may be combined in one person at the pleasure of the Executive Committee.
(e) Trustees. — Three (3) Trustees, to serve staggered three-year terms shall
be elected from members representing private groups, university groups, and
government groups respectively. It shall be the duty of the Trustees to represent
the interests of their respective groups as members of the Executive Committee
and to assist the President and other elected officers, as may be required, in the
administration of the Association.
The Executive Committee may employ such other persons as may be necessary
for the conduct of Association business.
Article VII. Elections: Elections shall be held at the annual meeting (Ref
Article VIII). Officers to be elected will include a President-elect, Secretary,
Treasurer (Ref Article VId), and one (1) Trustee.
Nominations for elective offices shall be made by a nominating committee ap-
pointed by the President. Nominations will also be accepted from the floor, as
called for, prior to balloting.
New officers and trustees shall assume their duties at the conclusion of the
annual meeting, and shall serve until their successors assume office.
Article VIII. Meetings : Meetings shall be held at least once a calendar year.
The first meeting of each calendar year shall be the annual meeting unless other-
wise designated by the Executive Committee. Advance notice of all meetings
shall be mailed by the Secretary (Ref Article Vic) to all members at least
thirty (30) days prior to the date of the meeting.
The presiding officer and ten (10) percent of the voting members shall con-
stitute a quorum. The location and date of all meetings shall be determined by a
majority vote of the Executive Committee.
Article IX. Amendments : This Constitution and By-laws may be amended at
any meeting by a majority vote representing a combination of all members present
plus any absentee ballots received up to the day of the balloting on the floor,
providing that the total votes cast constitute a quorum as defined in Article VIII.
All amendments must be submitted to the membership at least thirty (30) days
prior to the meeting at which they are to be considered.
Qualifications and Procedures for Certification by the Weather
Modification Association 2
purpose of certification
One of the purposes of the Weather Modification Association is to certify indi-
vidual members qualified to direct field experiments or operations in weather
modification. This certification is considered desirable to accomplish other pur-
2 From the "Journal of Weather Modification," v. 9, No. 1, April 1977, p. 202-204.
719
poses of the Association, namely, promoting research and engineering advance-
ments, encouraging and promoting the highest standards for professional conduct,
and assisting in arranging liability insurance upon application from members
performing field operations or experiments.
This document gives the qualifications and procedures for such certification
by the Weather Modification Association.
QUALIFICATION FOR CERTIFICATION
Certification of individuals to direct weather modification field experiments or
operations shall be based on character, knowledge, and experience. Certification
shall be made at the discretion of the Board, but the following shall be considered
minimum requirements :
General : A minimum of two years' field experience at the professional level in
directing weather modification operations or research shall be required of all
applicants, in addition to the experience and educational requirements specified
below :
Category A. — Eight (8) years' experience in weather modification field
operations or research.
Category B. — A degree in engineering, mathematics, or the physical sciences
plus two years' experience in weather modification field operations or research.
Category C. — A degree in meteorology, or a degree in engineering, mathematics,
or the physical sciences which includes or is in addition to at least 25 semester
hours of meteorological course work.
Weather modification field operations experience is defined to be that which
is involved in the organization, development, and actual conduct of field proj-
ects designed to effect a change in the weather. Actual manipulation to produce
a desired change is implied. In all cases, actual field experience is required to
insure the qualifications of the person certified. Operations may be either com-
mercial or research, but field operations of either type are required. "Professional
level" indicates a level of responsibility for direct supervision and conduct of
the field operations or substantial parts thereof.
COMPOSITION AND TERMS OF OFFICE OF CERTIFICATION BOARD
The initial Certification Board and the procedure by which the initial certifica-
tion procedures are to be adopted are given in motions passed by the Weather
Modification Association at their March 1967 meeting. The motions read as
follows :
Motion Xo. 1. — That the initial certification committee as specified in Article V
of the Constitution and Bylaws of the Weather Modification Association be com-
posed of three (3) Executive Officers of the W.C.R.A.
Motion Xo. 2. — That the initial certification committee establish the qualifica-
tions and procedures to be followed for certification, and present same by mail
for approval to all past officers of W.C.R.A. who are current members of the
organization.
Affirmative majority vote by those replying from this group shall constitute
approval of the procedures so specified. Subsequent changes in these procedures
shall be made only after affirmative majority vote of the certified members present
at any annual meeting.
The initial Certification Committee established by the March 1967 meeting of
the WMA shall function for calendar year 1968. The length of terms of office
of the initial certification board shal be determined by lot to be staggered to
permit the appointment of one new member in each year beginning 1969. At the
end of calendar year 1968. the President shall appoint one new member of the
Certification Board. In subsequent years, a new member of the Certification
Board shall be appointed by the President each year. As specified in Article V
of the Constitution and Bylaws of the Weather Modification Association, members
of the Certification Board shall each serve three years on staggered terms. The
member of the Certification Board who has the longest tenure on the Board shall
serve as chairman.
PROCEDURE AND FEES FOR CERTIFICATION
Persons desiring certification as individuals qualified for conducting field
experiments or operations in weather modification shall write to the Secretary
of the Weather Modification Association requesting an application form and in-
720
structions. The completed application form shall be returned to the Secretary and
must be accompanied by a $25 check made payable to the Weather Modifica-
tion Association. This fee will be retained by the Weather Modification Associa-
tion whether the application is accepted or denied.
The Certification Board shall review the application form and from the infor-
mation contained therein and any other information it obtains, will determine
whether the applicant has satisfied the requirements for qualification for certi-
fication. The Certification Board may request additional information from the
applicant prior to making a final decision as to whether or not the applicant
meets the criteria for certification.
After review of the application, the Chairman of the Certification Board shall
notify the applicant of the decision of the Board. If the application is approved,
the Chairman of the Certification Board shall give the applicant a certificate to
verify that the individual has met the qualification for certification.
Unsuccessful applicants may reapply for certification not earlier than one cal-
endar year after notification of disapproval. Each subsequent application for cer-
tification shall be accompanied by a payment of the $25 fee.
PERIOD OF CERTIFICATION AND RENEWAL
Certification of a member shall be effective for a period of three years from the
date of issuance. Application for renewal of certification shall be submitted prior
to expiration date in writing and accompanied by a fee of $5. Issuance of a
renewal of certification shall be automatic upon certification by the Board that
no notification of violation of the conditions of the original certification has been
received. In the event such notice has been received, renewal will be granted if
recommended by the Board. If the Board does not recommend renewal, the case
will be presented for the consideration of the certified members at two consecu-
tive meetings. Renewal shall be denied only if two-thirds of the certified mem-
bers in attendance at the second meeting indicate by secret written ballot that
renewal shall be denied. The $5 fee will be retained whether renewal is granted or
not.
Weather Modification Association
Proposed Draft Statement on Standards and Ethics for Weather Modification
Operators3 Prepared by Committee on Standards and Ethics, September 1977
PURPOSE
The Weather Modification Association (WMA) has adopted this statement
on ethics and standards in order to further the Association's purposes, which
inc lude but are not limited to :
1. Promoting research, development and understanding of weather modification
for beneficial uses.
2. Encouraging and promoting the highest standards of conduct.
CODE OF ETHICS
WMA members are expected to comply with the following code of ethics which
cover their relationships with the general public, their clients, and the meteoro-
logical profession.
Relationships with general public
1. The member will comply with all laws and regulations of the federal, state,
and local k'ovornmental units, particularly those laws and regulations covering
weather modification activities.
2. The member will not participate in activities detrimental to the general
public interest or which inflict undue hardship upon individuals in proposed
operational areas.
i ! rAlsttr,,hnt^ & members of the Weather Modification Association at the 1977 fall meet-
liit:. October 10. 1977. Champaign, Illinois, for review and comment.
721
Relationships with clients
3 The member will not exaggerate his (her) capabilities, nor guarantee results
in terms of future weather conditions. Statements regarding the probable effects
of weather modification projects should be compatible with the current State-
ment of Capabilities" set forth by the WMA, unless they can be justified on the
basis of documented results. ^ » ^
4 Contracts where a bonus is paid for "production of rainfall over and abo\e
some arbitrary amount, such as a monthly normal, are detrimental to the devel-
opment of a sound technology, and are to be discouraged. ^
5 The member will divulge fully to clients and potential clients all chemicals
and methods used. Proprietary rights to newly developed materials or tech-
niques for cloud seeding may be established through the obtaining of patents.
Relationships with meteorological profession
6. The member will conduct himself (herself) in a manner to reflect dignity and
honor on the profession.
7. The member will keep abreast of scientific and technical developments in the
field of weather modification and will seek to incorporate improvements into his
(her) operational and research programs.
8. The member will endeavor to contribute new knowledge to the profession by
making known significant results from operational and research programs.
9. The member will not knowingly take credit for work done by others, but will
attempt to give credit where due.
10. The member will not unjustly criticize fellow workers in his (her) profes-
sion, but will refer to the Association information on apparent unethical prac-
tices on the part of other operators.
STANDARDS FOR CONDUCT OF INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS
The following standards shall apply to the conduct of both operational and
research projects :
1. Each project should have a set of clearly defined objectives. The operator
should provide as precise a statement as possible of how the objectives are to be
reached.
2. The operator will not undertake work in an area where serious conflicts might
arise from weather modification activities, without taking steps to identify and
correct such situations in advance.
3. The operator will conduct each project in such a way as to minimize danger
to the public and to the environment from the use of seeding devices, seeding
agents, and other appurtenances of his (her) trade.
4. Each project should be under the personal direction of a meteorologist with
special training or experience in weather modification field projects.
5. The project meteorologist should have access to up-to-date weather data
including, as a minimum, the weather data available through circuits of the
National Weather Service. Local atmospheric soundings, wind observations, radar
data, and telemetered precipitation data from remote sites are highly desirable
supplements.
6. Each proect should have established criteria and procedures for shutting
down operations in the face of impending severe weather to avoid contributing
to, or appearing to contribute to, damaging weather situations. The shutdown cri-
teria and procedures should be specified in advance in writing, and should take
into account existing water management practices and flood control facilities.
7. A calibration curve showing ice nuclei output should be available for each
type of cloud seeding generator used on a project.
8. Evaluations of projects are strongly encouraged, but limitations imposed
by project duration, inadequacy of observations, and so on, should be pointed
out.
Appendix O
policy statement ol me American Meteorological
society on purpose! and inadvertent modification
ol weather and climate
As adopted by the Council on January 28, 1973
Introduction
Man's ability to alter certain local weather conditions,
either purposefully or inadvertently, in some areas is
clearly established. However, most atmospheric scientists
agree that man's ability to significantly alter the atmo-
spheric environment in a purposeful manner is still in
the early stages of development. Adequate research and
operational support in the 1970s should permit major
advances in developing weather modification techniques
in the next decade.
A new statement by the American Meteorological
Society (AMS) to inform the public and to answer sci-
entific questions about weather and climate modification
is therefore timely, and also useful in setting national
scientific priorities. Specifically, four conditions have
been significantly altered since the last AMS statement,
issued in 1967, and the changes which have dictated this
new statement include: 1) advances in knowledge and
techniques of planned weather modification, 2) new
evidence of urban-related inadvertent weather or climate
modification, 3) a growing need to assess the partially de-
veloped and rapidly evolving weather modification tech-
nology in light of public interest and concerns, and 4) a
need to issue recommendations regarding essential future
weather modification efforts.
Status of planned weather modification
As we move into the 1970s there is mounting scientific
evidence that cloud seeding using ice nuclei can produce
substantial, albeit local, changes in clouds and storm
systems. Definitive success in dispersing fog and in in-
creasing rainfall and snowfall has been achieved in the
United States and elsewhere in the 1960s.
Fog. Dissipation of cold (supercooled) fogs and low
stratus is established as an operational application with
clear economic benefits. Warm fog dissipation can gen-
erally be accomplished by expensive techniques, but a
reliable and economically acceptable technique for dissi-
pating warm fogs on a local scale is not established.
Precipitation. Precipitation amounts from certain cold
orographic clouds in winter can apparently be substan-
tially increased or decreased on a predictable basis, and
thus seeding of these types of clouds for economic benefit
appears to be justified. Seeding of cold orographic clouds
sometimes increases, sometimes decreases, and sometimes
has no effect on precipitation depending on the mete-
orological conditions. Overall increases from 5 to prob-
ably 30%, depending on location, seem reasonable with
existing technology for certain mountainous areas of
the western United States. Attempts to increase pre-
cipitation from convective clouds have provided local in-
creases under certain circumstances, and under other
circumstances local decreases. Too little is known about
the physical, chemical, and dynamical processes of con-
vective precipitation to make the outcome predictable in
most areas. Precipitation increases from non-orographic
and non-convective cloud systems, such as the shallow
stratiform winter storms of the central United States,
have not been demonstrated; but in theory, at least, it
is possible to increase or relocate precipitation from such
systems. There is also some evidence that precipitation
alterations may occur 100 kilometers or more beyond the
primary seeded areas, but much more proof and a better
understanding of these "downwind effects'* are needed.
Severe Storms. Results from efforts to mitigate the de-
struction of severe storms can be classed as encouraging
but still indeterminate. Positive but unsubstantiated
claims and growing optimism best describe results from
lightning suppression efforts in the United States, recent
hail suppression programs in the United States and
abroad, and hurricane modification efforts in the At-
lantic. Less optimism surrounds the possibilities of in-
hibiting tornadoes and severe local rainstorms. Too little
controlled experimentation concerning modification of
severe storms has been conducted to provide sufficient
credible evidence of success. Recent evidence, particu-
larly that from the Soviet Union and Europe, of hail
suppression appears to make it more credible than the
evidence for the control of other forms of severe storms.
Inadvertent weather modification
There is growing worldwide concern over man's inad-
vertent modification of weather and climate. Urban-
industrial pollutants (thermal, gaseous, and particulate
emissions) have been shown to alter urban weather and
climate, and new evidence establishes that alterations
occur in clouds and precipitation from 8 to 80 kilometers
downwind of urban-industrial sources. Recent investiga-
tions of major shifts in land use practices, such as irriga-
tion and different cropping, have pointed to possible
alterations in weather and climate over substantial
regions.
1 Reprinted from the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, v. 54, No. 7, July
1078, pp. 094-695.
(722)
723
Man's effect on global climate is suspected, since his
activities have resulted in regional changes in the cloud
cover and surface albedo, and widespread increases in
COt concentration and particulate concentration. How-
ever, there is no clear evidence yet that these changes
have accounted for any substantial part of the climatic
fluctuations of the past century.
Public issues
Recent advances towards achieving planned "weather
management." and an awareness of the reality of inad-
vertent weather modification, make it imperative that a
great deal more be understood about their social, ecologi-
cal, and legal implications. Limited economic and eco-
logical studies of the potential effects of planned weather
modification have produced conflicting results that point
to the need for comprehensive socioeconomic studies.
Before planned weather modification becomes a widely
applied technology, comprehensive analyses of the over-
all public interests on a local, regional, national, and
international scale must be made in order to achieve
rational judgments and decisions concerning the wise use
of weather modification.
Recommendations
Significant progress in weather modification has occurred
in recent years. It has been demonstrated that man can
and does modify the weather. However, we still have
much to learn about the following subjects: 1) the exact
atmospheric conditions in which it is possible to in-
crease, decrease or relocate precipitation; 2) those tech-
niques that might reduce the damage caused by severe
storms; or 3) the extent of climatic change being pro-
duced inadvertently by man. These three items should be
included among the major goals of our national pro-
gram in weather modification, and more unified and
stronger federal programs must be developed to meet
the demands created by a society which is increasing
in size and complexity.
Some specific recommendations regarding weather
modification activities in the 1970s include:
1) development of improved numerical models of con-
vective clouds and storm systems relevant to weather
modification efforts;
2) performance of comprehensive, randomized experi-
ments involving precipitation enhancement and re-
distribution in each of the major climatic zones of the
United States in each season and for each of the prin-
cipal forms of precipitation, with provisions for evalua-
tions of downwind effects;
3) pursuance of fundamental research and field ex-
periments to ascertain means of mitigating severe storms
(thunderstorms, hail, hurricanes, and tornadoes);
4) extended research on operational warm fog dis-
persion;
5) creation and expansion of facilities and expertise
devoted to this subject, including application of current
satellite programs, cloud physics research laboratories,
laboratories for developing seeding devices and seeding
agents, instrumented vehicles for penetrating severe
storms, and statistical research groups; and
6) encouragement of programs to study inadvertent
weather modification (a) by monitoring conditions
critical to the global climate and man's well-being, in-
cluding pollutants, water vapor, cloud cover, surface
albedo, and heat balance, and (b) by measuring and
defining the influences of urban development and land-
use change on weather and climate.
For additional information
A few of many possible references were selected for this
list describing the progress in all phases of weather and
climate modification in recent years. Inclusion of a refer-
ence does not necessarily imply our sanction of the
views or findings, but indicates it is a source of addi-
tional information for the interested reader.
American Meteorological Society, 45 Beacon Street, Bos-
ton, Massachusetts 02108, 1971: Proceedings of Inter-
national Conference on Weather Modification. Can-
berra, Australia, 372 pp.
American Meteorological Society, 45 Beacon Street, Bos-
ton, Massachusetts 02108, 1972: Preprints of Third
Conference on Weather Modification. Rapid City,
S. Dak, 336 pp.
National Academy of Sciences, Printing and Publishing
Office, 2101 Constitution Avenue, Washington, D.C.
20418, 1971: The Atmospheric Sciences and Man's
Needs: Priorities for Future. Washington, D.C, 88 pp.
National Academy of Sciences. Printing and Publish-
ing Office, 2101 Constitution Avenue, Washington,
D.C. 20418 (to be published): Weather and Climate
Modification, National Policies and Programs. Wash-
ington, D.C, 417 pp.
Colorado Associated University Press, University of
Colorado, 1424 15th Street, Boulder, Colorado 80302,
1967: Man and the Quality of his Environment:
Western Resources Conference, edited by J. E. Flack
and M. C. Shipley. Boulder, Colo., 251 pp.
Lambright, W. H.: Government and technological in-
novation: Weather modification as a case in point.
Public Administration Review, 1, 1-10. 1972: Ameri-
can Society for Public Administration, 1225 Connecti-
cut Avenue, NW, Washington. D.C. 20036.
Lackner, J. D.: Precipitation Modification. National
Water Commission Report NWC-EES-7 1-005. 1971:
National Water Commission, Room 405, 800 North
Quincy, Arlington, Virginia 22203, 170 pp.
M.I.T. Press, 28 Carleton Street. Cambridge, Mass. 02142.
1971: Study of Man's Impact on the Climate (SMIC
Report), 302 pp.
World Meteorological Organization, Case Postale No.
1, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, 1971: Present state
of knowledge and possible practical benefits in some
fields of weather modification. General Summary of
EC-XXII, Document 38, 3 pp.
Appendix P
Reporting Agencies of Member Countries and Questionnaire Cir-
culated To Receive Weather Modification Information From
Members of the World Meteorological Organization
Reporting Agencies
ARGENTINA Comiei6n Naoional de Investigaciones Eapaciales
Fuerza Aerea Argentina
1104 - Comodoro Pedro ZannJ 250
Buenos Aires
BRAZIL
Instituto de Atividades Espaciais
Divisao de Ciencias Atmosf Ericas
CTA/IAE
12000 - Sao Jose dos Campos, SP
BULGARIA
Hydrometeorological Service
Boulevard Lenin 66
Sofia
CANADA Cloud Physics Research Division
Atmospheric Environment Service
4905 Bufferin Street
Dovnsview, Ontario ^K3H 5^4
CUBA Somite de Programe Lluvia Provocada
Academia de Ciencias de Cuba
ININTEF, Calle 0 LTo. 8
Havana 4
CZECHOSLOVAKIA Hydrometeoro logical Institute
Jesnioval7
885 32-Koliba
FED. REP. OF GERMANY Ber Landrat des iandkreises Rosenheim
Landratsamt
82 Rosenheim/Obb.
HUNGARY
Meteorological Service of the Hungarian People'
Republic
Post Offioe Box 38
H-1525 Budapest
ISRAEL
ITALY
EMS subsd y "Mekorot"
"Mekorot" Water Co.
Post Offioe Box 308
Union
Societa Rioerche Esperienze Meteorologiche
Via Pasubio 11
Rome
MALAYSIA
Malaysian Meteorological Service
Jalan Sultan
Petaling Jaya
Selangor
(724)
725
MEXICO
NICAIiAGUA
NIGER
IIORVJAY
Philippines
ROMANIA
SPAIN
SWITZERLAND
THAILAND
TURKEY
U.S.A.
UPPER VOLT A
YUGOSLAVIA
Dcpartanento de IIidrometeorolo£ia y Prediccion
Direccion de Hidrolo^ia.
Versallus Vj , 4 pi so
Mexico 6 D.F.
Conision Nacional del Algodon
Seccion de Investi^aciones Climctolo£;icas
Apartado Postal ITo. .^655
Managua
Direction de la Metc'orolo^ie Ilationale
Bortc Po stale ITo. iilCJ
iTianey
Dirrctorato of Civil Aviation
Store*. 101) Dcp
Oslo 1
Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical ar:d
Astrononical Services Administration (i'AGASA)
Typhoon Moderation Research and Development Office
14 "'4 Quezon Avenue
Quezon City
Institut de mete orologie et d'hydrologie
Sos. Bucuresti-Ploiesti No. 97
Sector 1
Bucarest 18
Servicio Meteorolo/jico Nacional
Ciudad Universitaria
Apartado 235
Madrid
Laboratory for Atmospheric Physics
Federal Institute of Technology
H.P.P. HSnggerberg
G095 Zurich
The Royal Rain Making Research and Development
Institute
(no address given)
Turkish State Meteorological Service
Post Office Box Ho. 401
Ankara
Environmental Modification Office (EMS)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
6010 Executive Boulevard
Rockville, Maryland 20852
Direction de la Meteorologie Nationale
Boite Postale No. 576
Ouagadougou
Federal Hydrometeorological Institute
Bir&aninova 6
Post Office Box 604
11000 Belgrade
726
Copy of Questionnaire Circulated to Receive Information From Members
Member of WMO :
Reporting of activities in the year 19__.
1. Type (purpose) of weather modification activity or project :
2. Approximate size of the project area overall : km2.
and of the target area : km2.
3. Name and/or reference of project :
4. Location of area in which project is carried out :
5. Year project commenced : 19__.
6. Is it expected to continue during the coming year?
Yes No iNot known
7. Nature of national organization sponsoring project :
Please place X.
Governmental Private
Agriculture
Energy
Forestry ^
Hydrology
Transportation
Other (please specify)
8. Description of weather modification apparatus, modification agents and their
dispersal rates, the techniques employed, etc. (see instructions) .
9. Months of current reporting year during which seeding or other weather
modification activity took place :
10. Number of days during the year on which seeding (or other weather modi-
fication activity) took place:
11. Was a document prepared on the possible effects on the environment of the
weather modification project?
Yes
No
12. Optional remarks :
13. Reporting agency :
(a) Name of reporting agency :
(b) Official title of responsible office :
(c) Postal address :
Signed :
Date:
Please complete and return this questionnaire as soon as possible, and in any
case not later than 15 March 1977, to :
The Secretary-General
World Meteorological Organization
Case Postale No. 5
CH-1211 GENEVA 20
Notes for Completing Report on Weather Modification Activities
weather modification activities which should be included in the register
(1) The seeding or dispersing into clouds or fog of any substance with the
object of altering drop-size distribution, producing ice crystals or the coagulation
of droplets, altering the development of hail or lightning, or influencing in any
way the natural development cycle of clouds or their environment ;
(2) The use of fires or heat sources to influence convective circulation or to
evaporate fog ;
(3) The modification of the solar radiation exchange of the earth or clouds,
through the release of gases, dusts, liquids or aerosols into the atmosphere;
(4) The modification of the characteristics of land or water surfaces by dust-
ing or treating with powders, liquid sprays, dyes, or other materials;
(5) The releasing of electrically charged or radioactive particles, or ions, into
the atmosphere ;
(6) The application of shock waves, sonic energy sources, or other explosive
or acoustic sources to the atmosphere ;
727
(7) The use of aircraft and helicopters to produce downwash for fog dispersal
as well as the use of jet engines and other sources of artificial wind generation ;
(8) The use of lasers or other sources of electromagnetic radiation ;
(9) Any other similar activities falling within the definition of weather
modification.
WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES WHICH NEED NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE REGISTER
Activities of a purely local nature, such as the use of lightning deflection or
static discharge devices in aircraft, boats, or buildings, or the use of small heat
sources, fans, fogging devices, aircraft downwash, or sprays to prevent the oc-
currence of frost in tracts or fields planted with crops susceptible to frost or
freeze damage.
Completing the form
One completed copy of this form is requested for each weather modification
activity (hereafter referred to as the project) once per year.
Item 1 — Enter the purpose of the project or activity : e.g. rainfall increase,
hail suppression, cold fog dispersal, etc.
Item 2 — Enter the size (in km2) of the area designated for the project, and
the size of the target area if different (see "Definition", item 4) .
Item 3 — Enter the name and/or reference of project used by the operator. If
the project was reported in the previous Register, please quote the WMO Regis-
ter Number which appears in column 1.
Item 4 — Indicate the location of the weather modification project by geographi-
cal co-ordinates and name of the region.
Item 5 — Enter the year in which the first activities under the present project
took place.
Item 6 — Indicate whether the project is expected to continue in the future.
Item 7 — Indicate the nature of the organization sponsoring the project and
whether it is governmental (including local governments) or private.
Item 8 — Describe the weather modification apparatus, modification agents and
the techniques used. This might include type of ground or airborne apparatus
used, type of modification material dispersed, rate of dispersal in grams per hour
or other appropriate descriptions, and other information such as type of radars,
type of aircraft used, techniques employed (e.g. cloud base seeding at 3,000
m msl), etc.
Item 9 — Enter the months of the year to which the report applies during which
seeding, etc.. was carried out.
Item 12 — This item is to permit the reporting person to include any information
not covered by item 1 through 11 but which he feels is significant or of interest
such as references to published reports describing results of the weather modifi-
cation operation or experiment. Any definite plans for a new project during the
coming year may be outlined under item 12.
Item 13 — Please supply the name and address of agency to which any request
for further information should be directed.
Use a separate sheet of paper if more space is needed.
Definitions
As used in the WMO Register, terms have the following meaning :
Item 1 — Type (purpose) of weather modification activity or project: By proj-
ect is meant a related series of weather modification activities having a common
objective. Will be included any activity performed with the intention of pro-
ducing artificial changes in the composition, behaviour or dynamics of the
atmosphere.
Item 4 — Location of area in which project is carried out : The area referred to
includes both the target area and control area. By target area is meant the
ground area within which the effects of the weather modification activity are
expected to be found, and by control area is meant a preselected, untreated
ground area used for comparison with the target area.
Item 8 — Description of weather modification apparatus, etc. : By weather modi-
fication apparatus is meant any apparatus used with the intention of producing
artificial changes in the composition, behaviour, or dynamics of the atmosphere.
For example : seeding generators, propane devices, flares, rockets, artillery pro-
jectiles, jet engines, etc.
Appendix Q
Report of the World Meteorological Organizatiox/United Na-
tions Environment Program Informal Meeting on Legal Aspects
of Weather Modification
World Meteorological Organization and United Nations Environment
Program, Geneva, November 17 to 21, 1975
1. organization of the meeting
J. I Opening of the meeting
1.1.1 The Chairman, Professor R. List, declared the meeting open at 10 :00
a.m. on Monday 17 November 1975. The list of participants is reproduced in Ap-
pendix A.
1.1.2 Mr. O. M. Ashford, Director of Program Planning and UN Affairs of
the WM() Secretariat, welcomed the participants to the Headcpiarters of WMO on
behalf of the Secretary-General, expressing appreciation to UNEP for having
taken the initiative in arranging the meeting and for providing support to the par-
ticipants. He observed that when the Seventh World Meteorological Congress in
April 1975 decided to launch the Weather Modification Program, this
marked a considerable change in the position of the Organization in this respect
which was in line with the trend to give greater attention to the broad socio-eco-
nomic responsibilities of WMO as a specialized agency of the United Nations.
WMO already collaborated with UNEP in some ten different projects, and the
present meeting where persons from different disciplines could discuss together
topics of common interest was a good example of such collaboration. In conclu-
sion Mr. Ashford gave a special word of thanks to the six experts nominated by
WMO who had agreed to come to present on behalf of the Organization the current
scientific situation in weather modification.
1.1.3 Mr. R. S. Mikhail, Deputy Director of the Division of Geophysics, Global
Pollution and Health of the UNEP Secretariat conveyed the greetings of the Ex-
ecutive Director of UNEP and expressed appreciation to WMO for having orga-
nized the meeting in Geneva and thanked the co-chairman and participants for
having come. He informed the meeting that the Governing Council of UNEP
in March 1975 had agreed that the dialogue between WMO and UNEP on legal
aspects of Weather Modification should continue since it was essential that inter-
national legal principles and guidelines should be considered hand in hand with
the scientific advancement of the subject. Mr. Mikhail expressed the opinion that
if the present state of scientific knowledge in the area of weather modification
was not yet adequate to permit the development of formal legal instruments for
the regulation of activities in this area, it was nevertheless feasible to develop
general principles and operating guidelines as a first step in that direction.
X.% Adoption of tlte agenda
1.2.1 The agenda as adopted as reproduced in Appendix P>. List of supporting
paper* available at the time of the meeting is reproduced in Appendix C.
2. REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE THIRD SESSION OF THE WMO EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE PANEL ON WEATHER MODIFICATION IN NOVEMBER 1974
2.1 Relevant decision 8 of the third session of the Governing Council of T'NEP
2.1.1 The meeting was informed that according to the decisions of the Governing
Council, the strategy of UNEP in respect of the legal aspects of weather modifi-
cation is as follows :
1 ;i ' Consultations will be continued towards development of legal provi-
sions which would define the responsibility of States to ensure that weather
modification experiments and operations within their jurisdiction or control
(728)
729
do not cause damage to the environment of other States or to areas beyond
the limits of national jurisdiction ;
(b) The Executive Director will continue to consult with WMO and other
scientific and legal experts as necessary on the desirability of developing
general principles and operating guidelines on weather modification experi-
ments and operations. He proposes a meeting between scientists and legal ex-
perts to develop such principles and guidelines. The question of calling an in-
tergovernmental meeting to approve such principles and guidelines would be
considered at a later stage, after consensus is reached between scientists and
legal advisers.
2.2 Relevant decisions of the seventh session of Congress and of the twenty-
seventh session of the Executive Committee of WMO
2.2.1 The Weather Modification Program of WMO incorporates as its most im-
portant component a Precipitation Enhancement Project (PEP) which will be
an internationally planned, executed and evaluated experiment in artificial pre-
cipitation stimulation. The meeting was informed that in Resolution 12 (Cg-VII)
Congress had specifically asked the Executive Committee in developing the
plans for PEP to give particular consideration to minimizing any legal liability of
WMO.
2.2.2 The position of the WMO Congress was in accord with that of the UNEP
Governing Council in that international legal principles and guidelines should
be developed hand in hand with the scientific progress in the field of weather mod-
ification. Congress was of the opinion that a better understanding of the physical
basis of weather modification was needed before WMO would be able to provide
definitive advice to Members on this aspect of weather modification experiments
or operations.
2.2.3 The meeting agreed that scientific advancement in general did not pro-
gress smoothly, but was somewhat erratic and even subject to reverses on occa-
sions. It was suggested that over a relatively short time scale the keyword should
perhaps be "in phase" rather than "hand in hand".
2.3 Relevant decisions of the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament
(CCD) of the United Nations
2.3.1 The meeting noted with interest that at the request of the Conference of
the Commitee on Disarmament, some experts had attended an informal meeting
in Geneva in order to provide the Committee with scientific and technical back-
ground information concerning weather modification. Following this scientific
briefing, the representatives of the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R. had submitted inde-
pendently an identical draft text for a convention on the prohibition of military
or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques. The General
Assembly of the United Nations was currently discussing the report of the CCD
and would indicate the future action to be taken on this draft.
2.3.2 The meeting was also informed that it was proposed to include a limita-
tion on the use of environmental warfare in the protocols to the Geneva Conven-
tions of 1949 now under discussion in a Diplomatic Conference on Humanitarian
Law (Geneva).
3. REVIEW OF THE STATE OF THE ART AND POSSIBLE DEVELOPMENTS
3.1 National laws related to weather modification
3.1.1 Professor Samuels introduced this item and drew attention to some of the
difficulties encountered in obtaining accurate up-to-date information, and in com-
paring different legal systems. After summarizing the principal control tech-
niques and substantive rules as found mainly in the special laws of Australia,
Canada, South Africa, and the United States, he recommended in particular
the establishment of an international register of relevant national legislation
and the development of a model national law comprising certain essentials such
as registration and data reporting for all weather and climate modification
activities.
3.1.2 In the ensuing discussion, reference was made to additional sources of
national law, including the applicable rules contained in water legislation (e.g.,
Peru 1969), in natural resources legislation (e.g. Colombia 1974), and in the
general body of environmental, administrative and civil law (e.g., in the
U.S.S.R.) . It was pointed out that even in those countries where special legisla-
tion had been enacted, a single statutory text normally could not cover all rele-
vant aspects of weather modification.
730
3.1.3 There was general agreement on the desirability of an improved col-
lection and mutual exchange of legislative information, also from an educational
point of view. It was noted with satisfaction that WMO was initiating a register
of weather modification activities and that the questionnaire circulated to Mem-
bers to obtain information for inclusion in the register inquired as to the
existence of laws relating to weather modification activities in the country
concerned. The meeting suggested that WMO Members should be invited to
supply full details of such laws so as to facilitate a complete compilation of
national laws. However, the meeting agreed that indiscriminate transfer of laws
from one country to another was not practicable, but that laws needed to be
adapted to specific requirements of different legal and social systems.
3.1.4 In this connexion, reservations were expressed as to the feasibility of
technical assistance and expert advice by WMO/UNEP to individual states on
legal aspects of weather modification at the present stage of scientific knowledge.
In particular, while legal rules on registration and data reporting were generally
considered as beneficial, premature rules on liability for damage were viewed
as potentially counter-productive.
3.2 The science of weather modification
3.2.1 The meeting agreed that the discussion would be concerned solely with
intentional weather modification.
3.2.2 The meeting had the opportunity to examine the official WMO state-
ment released in 1974 entitled "Present state of knowledge and possible practical
benefits in some fields of weather modification" (see Appendix D) and also the
amplification of this statement which had been prepared for use by the Secretary-
General of WMO.
3.2.3 It was agreed that the statement and its amplification represented the
current state of knowledge in the field of weather modification ; the meeting noted
that the International Commission on Cloud Physics of the International Asso-
ciation of Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics (IAMP) and indicated
satisfaction at the statement and at Weather Modification Programs of WMO.
It was recalled that the Precipitation Enhancement Project of WMO was de-
signed to obtain further scientifically acceptable information concerning the
feasibility of artificial stimulation of precipitation.
3.2.4 The meeting was informed that the role of WMO at the present time in
helping developing countries was to give advice, on request, concerning proposed
weather modification projects and occasionally to provide experts under the
UNDP to visit countries in order to assess the possibilities of artificial precipita-
tion augmentation. It was hoped to arrange courses in weather modification and
to offer fellowships in these courses to a certain number of scientists from
developing countries.
3.2.5 Seventh Congress strongly urged that when a Member country or a
group of Members wished to conduct their own weather modification with the
advice of WMO, a special WMO group of experts be set up to advise on the
planning, implementation and evaluation of the project. The high scientific stat-
ure and independence of such a group would permit it to guide the project along
sound scientific lines and thereby assume the greatest chance of success and
ultimate acceptance of the results by the scientific community. The cost involved
In providing for a WMO group for a special project of this kind would be borne
by the Member or Members concerned.
3.2.6 There was a considerable discussion on the distinction for legal pur-
poses between a weather modification experiment and an operation. It was gen-
erally agreed that in an experiment the major objective was using scientifically
acceptable met bods to obtain information, whereas in an operation the objective
\\a- i.) influence the atmospheric processes so as to produce a desired effect, e.g.
additional rainfall. In the latter case, a scientific evaluation of the intervention
was frequently not made. It was pointed out however that for the purpose of
determination of legal liability the distinction was irrelevant.
■l.i Legal problems facing public and private operators
3.8.1 Professor Samuels introduced this agenda item. He suggested that the
key problem facing operators is tbe legal responsibility they may hear for damage
cans. , i by their activities. He pointed out the difference between legal systems
ae regards tbe type of damage for which compensation may be received, the
111 Of liability and tbe kind of proof required. He also drew attention to
possible Links between an operator's liability and a State's international respon-
sibility in the event of alleged extended area effects.
731
3.3.2 After a general discussion on the state of international environmental
law and on the recourse available in situations involving alleged trans-frontier
damage, the meeting briefly reviewed past experience with court litigation regard-
ing injunctions and liability for damage. Weather modification activities, no
adverse effects of which have been proved on the basis of the present state of
scientific knowledge, were distinguished from other activities involving pollution
and other harmful effects ; the view was expressed that the development of new
beneficial technology should not be constrained unduly by "Punitive" legal sanc-
tions. Instead, the preventive function of administrative law was emphasized,
especially in the field of licensing procedures and mandatory environmental
impact assessment.
3.3.3 There followed a discussion on the practices of, and available controls
over, private operators engaged in weather modification abroad, especially in
developing countries. The meeting was informed of the 1973 recommendations
of the WMO Commission for Atmospheric Sciences, which advised governments
to seek advice from WMO on this subject and of the consequent decision of the
WMO Seventh Congress authorizing the Secretary-General to establish on re-
quest a special WMO group of experts to advise on the planning, implementation
and evaluation of projects where the costs involved will be borne by the Mem-
ber (s) concerned. (See paragraph 3.2.5 above.)
4. DISCUSSION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND OPERATING GUIDE-
LINES FOR WEATHER MODIFICATION
4.1 The meeting discussed in general terms the scientific, economic, ecological,
sociological and political considerations which need to be taken into account in
the development of general legal principles and operating guidelines for weather
modification activities. It then turned to a discussion of the background paper
on legal principles prepared by Professors E. B. Weiss and J. W. Samuels,
UNBP legal experts. It was made clear that the discussion was not aimed at
developing binding legal rules but rather at developing proposals for general
principles to be considered in the formulation of a future legal regime. The legal
experts expressed their desire for the advice of the scientists in the elaboration
of general legal principles and operating guidelines. The WMO experts noted
that they did not feel qualified to engage in detailed discussion of principles
which were essentially political in spirit.
4.2 The first proposed principle which recognized the interest of all mankind
in the weather was introduced. It was explained that this legal concept was
employed in other common resource areas, such as the deep sea-bed beyond the
limits of national jurisdiction. The meeting considered that a proper formulation
of this principle, in this context, would be: "The earth's atmosphere is a part
of the common heritage of mankind".
It was suggested that ultimately any statement of principles should be preceded
by a Preamble in which reference is made to the WMO Statement on Weather
Modification and the uncertainty of the state of the art. Furthermore, it was
suggested that any commentary on this principle should make reference to the
inextricable links between the atmosphere and other environmental spaces, e.g.
the world's oceans, which are also part of the common heritage of mankind.
4.3 Concerning the second proposed principle which called for the limitation
of the use of weather modification techniques to peaceful purposes, the meeting
was of the opinion that the inclusion of the following provision in the general
principles would be useful : "Any techniques developed to modify weather shall
be dedicated exclusively to peaceful purposes."
Whereas the original proposals concerned weather and climate modification, on
the advice of WMO experts reference is made only to weather modification.
4.4 The third proposed principle, which concerned the gathering and exchange
of meteorological information was introduced. It was made clear that the WMO
Convention already calls for such an exchange. Bearing this in mind, the meeting
was of the opinion that a useful formulation would be : "Further to the continued
exchange of meteorological and related information in accordance with the
WMO Convention, States shall facilitate the gathering and exchange of infor-
mation on weather modification activities and shall ensure that such information
is made available to WMO and to interested States."
It was noted that WMO already receives reports from States on weather
modification activities.
732
4.5 The fourth proposed principle concerned the giving of prior notification
of prospective weather modification activities to interested States It was ex
plained that "adequate" and "timely" notification would help to defuse interna-
tional tension arising from misinformation and speculation concerning a neieh
hour s activities. "Adequate" imports that the information provided shows clearlv
what will be done. "Timely" means that the notified State is given the time to
analyze the information and consult with the acting State before the activitv
is conducted. In discussion, reference was made to UN General Assemblv reso
lutions 3129 (XXVIII) and 2995 (XXVII) in which the Assemblv expressed its
consideration that the development and management bv States of shared natural
resources should be based on a system of information and prior consultation in
the spirit of co-operation and good neighbourliness. It was pointed out that the
I NEP Governing Council was of the opinion that weather modification activi-
ties were related to the area of shared natural resources but that a separate
development of legal principles for weather modification is of value.
4.6 The meeting discussed in considerable detail the problems inherent in
the formulation of a principle concerning notification. In particular, the meeting
explored the questions of how the decision is made on whom to notify, and what
would be the mechanics of this notification. The WMO experts emphasized the
limitations of the state of the art and the problems this posed in suggesting that
neighbouring States might be affected by the weather modification activities. The
meeting considered that a useful wording of a principle on notification would be :
'•States shall in good faith give adequate and timely notification of prospective
major weather modification activities, within their jurisdiction or control, to
WMO which should transmit such notification to all interested States."
This formulation involves the concept of "major" activities. It is only for activi-
ties of this significance that notification is necessary. Because there is judgment
involved in what is "adequate", "timely" and "major", the notion of "good
faith" was included to provide some legal standard for the judgment.
4.7 The meeting turned to a consideration of the possibility of requiring
States to undertake an assessment of the environmental impact* of an activity
before it is conducted. The feasibility of such an assessment was questioned. The
possibility of incorporating the concept in the aforementioned fourth principle
was discussed and it was pointed out that the history of the development of
national environmental legislation in several States indicated that notification
and impact assessment were two separate requirements, to be dealt with as
distinct obligations.
4.8 Whilst the meeting was unable to concur in recommending a principle
concerned with the assessment, of the potential immediate and long-term environ-
mental effects of weather modification activities, the following formulation was
considered as being useful for further thought : "States shall ensure that a care-
ful assessment is made of the environmental impact of prospective major weather
modification activities within their jurisdiction or control, and shall make such
assessments available to WMO and all interested States".
4.9 Discussion then turned to the possibility of prohibiting certain weather
modification activities which offered the risk of significant harm, unless the con-
sent of all interested States is obtained. It was pointed out that analogous limi-
tation could be inferred from Recommendation 70 of the Stockholm Declaration
and from UN General Assembly Resolution 2995 (XXVII). Concern was expressed
that such a legal principle was unnecessary given the state of the art today and
that express application of the general limitations found in the Stockholm Dec-
laration, etc., to the field of weather modification was unwarranted. The meeting
decided that such a principle should be deferred for further consideration.
4.10 The meeting then moved lo consideration of the possibility of requiring
States to monitor weather modification activities under their jurisdiction and
control and to make such information available to interested States and the
WMO. It was pointed out that in several States there was already legislation pro-
viding for the obligation to monitor. The meaning of the word "monitor" was dis-
cussed and it was suggested that it imports the observance of and recording of
information concerning the conduct and effects of the activity during and after its
undertaking.
4.11 Although no agreement was reached concerning the degree of monitoring,
the meeting was of the opinion that the followng formulation was valuable for
further consideration: "States shall make every effort to ensure that weather
modification activities within their jurisdiction or control are monitored, and
733
shall make such information available to WMO and interested States in accord-
ance with Principle Three".
4.12 The possibility was considered of a formulation which would apply Prin-
ciple 21 of the Stockholm Declaration to the field of weather modification, namely
that States should ensure that weather modification activities within their juris-
diction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of
areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. The WMO experts considered
that it was premature to recommend such a principle in view of the present
limited state of scientific knowledge.
4.13 The meeting then moved to a discussion of the possibility of a principle
calling for consultation between the acting State and other interested States in
order to alleviate points of difference between the parties concerning proposed
weather modification activities. The legal experts of UNEP pointed out that such
consultation can be a useful means of mantaining friendly relations among States.
Mention was made of the agreement between Canada and the United States which
calls for such consultation in certain circumstances.
4.14 The meeting was of the opinion that a principle imposing a duty on States
to consult would not be desirable, but that the following draft text would be pref-
erable : "It is desirable that a State, in whose territory major weather modifica-
tion activities are to be undertaken, should engage in meaningful and timely con-
sultation with interested states at their request, with a view to working out
mutually acceptable arrangements regarding the conduct of those activities".
The meeting made note of the following points in this formulation. Firstly, it
concerns only "major" activities. Secondly "interested" States would involve the
notion of legitimate concern. Thirdly, the consultation would be at the request of
the interested States.
4.15 The meeting turned to the discussion of a possible principle recognizing
the obligation of States to compensate persons beyond their national frontiers for
significant damage caused by weather modification activities within their juris-
diction. It was noted that the state of the art today precluded any assessment of
damage and the WMO experts express the opinion that the recommendation of
any such principle was premature.
4.16 The legal experts of UNEP were of the opinion that it would be useful to
include the principle that States shall co-operate in the development of a legal
regime for the international regulation of weather modification activities.
4.17 In conclusion, reference was made to the future possibility of national
legislation to implement any international legal principles and operating guide-
lines. The view was expressed that it might be useful to include in the general
principles a provision that would call on States to adopt legislation to regulate
weather modification activities at the national level.
5. LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE WMO PRECIPITATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
5.1 In Resolution 12 (Cg-VII) the WMO Congress, in approving the Precipita-
tion Enhancement Project (PEP) as part of the Weather Modification Pro-
gramme of WMO requested the Executive Committee to give particular considera-
tion to minimizing and legal liability of WMO.
5.2 The meeting was informed that preliminary preparations for PEP were
already under way but that the experiment itself would not start for at least two
years and would toe of several years' duration.
5.3 It was agreed that in the implementation of PEP careful attention would
need to be given to the various legal aspects involved in any agreement between
WMO and the state in which PEP will be conducted (for example immunity and
liability in the case of gross negligence), and it was suggested that advice from
legal experts be sought by WMO in this respect. The meeting observed that con-
siderable legal experience had been acquired by organizations in the UN system
in conducting projects in many different States, and that experience had shown
that the time required to draw up such an agreement might amount to as much as
a year.
6. ADOPTION OF THE FINAL REPORT
The meeting was able to approve the text of the report of items 1 to 4 during
the session and it was agreed that the chairman and co-chairman should be
authorized to approve the remainder of the report on behalf of the meeting.
34-857 O - 79 - 49
734
7. CLOSING OF THE MEETING
The chairman and co-chairman each thanked the participants for their valu-
able contributions, and especially for the great lengths to which the legal and
scientific experts had gone in endeavouring to understand each other's point of
view. Appreciation was expressed to the authors of the documents for the session
and for the support given by the WMO Secretariat. The representatives of UNEP
and WMO also associated themselves with these remarks. The meeting was
declared closed at 5 :30 p.m. on Thursday 20 November 1975.
WMO/UNEP Informal Meeting on Legal Aspects of Weather
Modification, Geneva, November 17 to 21, 1975
list of participants
Experts nominated by UNEP
J. W. Samuels (Co-Chairman), A. C. Kiss, M. Piskotin, P. H. Sand, and
E. Brown Weiss.
Representatives of UNEP
R. S. Mikhail, H. Ahmed, and P. A. Bliss.
Experts nominated by WMO
R. List (Chairman), A. L. Alusa, A. Gagin, P. Goldsmith, R. Lavoie, and Y.
Sedunov.
Representatives of WMO
0. M. Ashford, and N. K. Kljukin.
WMO Secretariat
R. D. Bojkov, E. Bollay, and R. M. Perry.
AGENDA
1. Organization of the meeting :
1.1 Opening of the session.
1.2 Adoption of the agenda.
2. Review of developments since the third session of the WMO Executive
Committee Panel on Weather Modification in November 1974 :
2.1 Relevant decisions of the third session of the Governing Council of
UNEP.
2.2 Relevant decisions of the seventh session of Congress and of the
twenty-seventh session of the Executive Committee of WMO.
2.3 Relevant decisions of the Conference of the Committee on Disarma-
ment (CCD) of the United Nations.
3. Review of the State of the Art and possible developments :
3.1 National laws related to weather modification.
3.2 The science of weather modification.
3.3 Legal problems facing public and private operators.
4. Discussion of the development of general principles and operating guide-
lines for weather modification experiments and operations.
5. Legal aspects of the WMO precipitation enhancement project.
6. Adoption of the final report.
7. Closing of the meeting.
list of supporting papers available at the time of the meeting
2.1 : The decisions of UNEP Governing Council.
2.2: The decisions of Seventh WMO Congress and twenty-seventh WMO
Executive Committee.
2.3 : The draft-convention proposed to CCD by U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. on 21
August 1975.
8.3 : Review paper prepared by UNEP consultant Professor Samuels.
8.2 : Official WMO Statement on the present state of knowledge.
8.8 : Review paper prepared by UNEP consultant Professor Samuels.
4: Review paper prepared by UNEP consultants Professor Samuels and E.
Brown Weiss.
6 : WMO decisions on Weather Modification Programme and Precipitation
Enhancement Project.
Appendix R
Text of Senate Resolution 71, Considered, Amended, and Agri
to July 11, 1973
93d CONGRESS
1st Session
S. RES. 71
[Report No. 93-270]
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
February 22,1973
Mr. Pell (for himself, Mr. Hath, Mr. Case, Mr. Chuhch, Mr. Cranston, Mr.
Gravel, Mr. Hart, Mr. Hoijjngs. Mr. Huohes, Mr. Humphrey, Mr. Javitk,
Mr. Kennedy, Mr. MuGovern, Mr. Mondale, Mr. Muskie, Mr. Nelson.
Mr. Stevenson. Mr. Tuxxey, and Mr. Williams) submitted tlie following
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations
Jvne 27 (legislative day, June 25), 1973
Reported by Mr. Pell, with amendments
July 11,1973
Considered, amended, and agreed to
RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of (lie Semite that the United States Gov-
ernment should seek the agreement of oilier governments to
a proposed treaty prohibiting the use of any environmental
or geophysical modification activity as a weapon of war, or
the carrying out of any research or experimentation directed
thereto.
Whereas there is vast scientific potential for human betterment
through environmental and geophysical controls; and
Whereas there is great danger to the world ecological system if
environmental and geophysical modification activities are not
controlled or if used indiscriminately; and
Whereas the development of weapons-oriented environmental
and geophysical modification activities will create a threat
to peace and world order; and
V
APPENDIX R
(735)
736
2
Whereas the United States Government should seek agreement
with other governments on the complete cessation of any
research, experimentation, or use of any such activity as a
weapon of war : Now, therefore, be it
1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the
2 United States Government should seek the agreement of
3 other governments, including all Permanent Members of the
4 Security Council of the United Nations, to a treaty along the
5 following general lines which will provide for the complete
y cessation of any research, experimentation, and use of any
7 environmental or geophysical modification activity as a
3 weapon of war:
9 "The Parties to this Treaty,
10 "Recognizing the vast scientific potential for human
H betterment through environmental and geophysical
12 controls,
13 "Aware of the great danger to the world ecological
14 system of uncontrolled and indiscriminate use of environ-
15 menial and geophysical modification activities,
1G "Recognizing that the development of wcapons-
17 oriented environmental and geophysical modification
18 techniques will create a threat to peace and world order,
19 "Proclaiming as their principal aim the achievement
20 of an agreement on the complete cessation of research,
737
3
1 experimentation, and use of environmental and geo-
2 physical modification activities as weapons of war,
3 "Have agreed as follows:
4 "Article I
5 "(1) The States Parties to this Treaty undertake to
6 prohibit and prevent, at any place, any environmental or
7 geophysical modification activity as a weapon of war;
8 " (2) The prohibition in paragraph 1 of this article shall
9 also apply to any research or experimentation directed to
10 the development of any such activity as a weapon of war,
11 but shall not apply to any research, experimentation, or use
12 for peaceful purposes;
13 " (3) The States Parties to this Treaty undertake not to
14 assist, encourage or induce any State to carry out activities
15 referred to in paragraph 1 of this article and not to partiei-
](> pate in any other way in such actions.
17 "Article II
18 "In this Treaty, the term 'environmental or geophysical
19 modification activity' includes any of the following activities:
20 "(1) any weather modification activity which has
21 as a purpose, or has as one of its principal effects, a
22 change in the atmospheric conditions over any part of
23 the earth's surface, including, hut not limited to, any
24 activity designed to increase or decrease precipitation,
738
4
1 increase or suppress bail, lightning, or fog, and direct
2 or divert storm systems ;
3 "(2) any climate modification activity which has
4 as a purpose, or has as one of its principal effects, a
5 change in the long-term atmospheric conditions over
G any part of the earth's surface;
7 "(3) any earthquake modification activity which
8 has as a purpose, or has as one of its principal effects,
9 the release of the strain energy instability within the
10 solid rock layers beneath the earth's crust ;
n "(4) any ocean modification activity which has as
12 a purpose, or has as one of its principal effects, a change
13 in the ocean currents or the creation of a seismic dis-
14 turbance of the ocean (tidal wave) .
ir> "Article III
Hi "Five years after the entry into force of this Treaty, a
17 conference of Parties shall be held at (ieneva, Switzerland,
18 in order to review the operation of this Treaty with a view
1!) to assuring that the purposes of the preamble and the pro-
L»0 visions of I lie Treaty are being realized. Such review shall
21 take into account any relevant technological developments
22 in order to determine whether the definition in Article If
23 should be amended.
24 "Article IV
25 "1. Any Party may propose an amendment to this
26 Treaty. The text of any proposed amendment shall be sub-
739
5
1 mitted to the Depositary Governments which shall circulate
2 it to all parties to this Treaty. Thereafter, if requested to do
3 so hy one-third or more of the Parties, the Depositor}' (Jov-
4 ernments shall convene a conference, to which they shall
5 invite all the Parties, to consider such an amendment.
6 "2. Any amendment to this Treaty shall be approved
7 by a majority of the votes of all the Parties to this Treaty.
8 The amendment shall enter into force for all Parties upon the
9 deposit of instruments of ratification by a majority of all
10 the Parties.
11 "Article V
12 "1. This Treaty shall be of unlimited duration.
13 "2. Each Party shall, in exercising its national sov-
14 creignty, have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it
13 decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject
1o' mailer of this Treat}', have jeopardized the supreme interests
17 of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all
18 olher Parties to the Treaty three months in advance.
V.) Article VI
20 "1. This Treaty shall be open to all States for signature.
21 Any State which docs not sign this Treaty before its entry
22 into force in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article
23 may accede to it at any time.
24 "2. This Treaty shall be subject to ratification by sig-
25 natory States. Instruments of ratification and instruments of
740
6
1 accession shall be deposited with the Governments of the
2 United States of America, , and
3 which are hereby designated the Depositary Governments.
4 "3. This Treaty shall enter into force after its ratifica-
5 tion by the States, the Governments of which are designated
6 Depositaries of the Treaty.
7 "4. For States whose instruments of ratification or ac-
8 cession are deposited subsequent to the entry into force of
9 this Treaty, it shall enter into force on the date of the de-
10 posit of their instruments of ratification or accession.
11 "5. The Depositary Governments shall promptly inform
12 all signatory and acceding States of the date of each signa-
13 ture, the date of deposit of each instrument of ratification of
14 and accession to this Treaty, the date of its entry into force,
15 and the date of receipt of any requests for conferences or
16 other notices.
17 "6. This Treaty shall be registered by the Depositary
18 Governments pursuant to Article 102 of the Charter of the
19 United Nations."
Appendix S
Reported Cases on Weather Modification
Slutsky v. City of Neiv York, 197 Misc. 730, 97 N.Y.S. 2d 238 (Sup. Ct, 1950).
Southwest Weather Research, Inc. v. Rounsaville, 320 S.W. 2d 211 (Tex. Civ.
App., 1958), and Southicest Weather Research, Inc. v. Duncan, 319 S.W. 2d
940 (Tex. Civ. App. 1958), both affd. sub nom. Southwest Weather Research, Inc.
v. Jones, 160 Tex. 104, 327 S.W. 2d 417 (1959) .
Summerville v. North Platte Valley Weather Control DIM., 170 Neb. 46, 101
X.W. 2d 748 (1960).
Pennsylvania Natural Weather Assn. v. Blue Ridge Weather Modification
Assn., 44 Pa. D. & C. 2d 749 (1968) .
(741)
Appendix T
Glossary of Selected Terms in Weather Modification 1
GLOSSARY _!/
ACRE- FOOT— The volume of water required to cover
one acre to a depth of one foot: 43,560 cubic feet,
325,852 gallons
AEROSOL— A colloidal system in which the dispersed
phase Is composed of either solid or liquid particles,
and in which the dispersion medium is some gas.
usually air.
There is no clear-cut upper limit to the size of
particles comprising the dispersed phase in an aerosol,
but as in ail other colloidal systems, it is rather com-
monly set at 1 micron. Haze, most smokes, and some
fogs and clouds may thus be regarded as aerosols.
AIRCRAFT SEEDING— The use of aircraft to dispense
cloud seeding agent*.
ALTOCUMULUS— A principal type of cloud, 8,000 to
20,000 feet, consisting of a layer where the denser
parts have modified cumuliform characteristics of
roundness and sharpness of outline.
ALT08TRATU8 — A principal type of "middle" cloud
(altitude approx. 8,000 to 20,000 feet), appearing
as a fairly uniform grey layer that often covers the
entire sky.
ANVIL CLOUD— Popular name given to a cumulonim
bus cloud whose upper, ice-crystal portion is spread
out horizontally to give the appearance of an anvil.
In the International Cloud Classification, this is a
"cumulonimbus caplllatus" cloud with the supplemen
tary feature "incus."
ARTIFICIAL NUCLEATION — Any process whereby
the nucleation of cloud particles .s Initiated or accel-
erated by human intervention.
CAP CLOUD -An approximately stationary cloud, on
or hovering above an Isolated mountain peak. It is
formed by the cooling and condensation of humid air
forced up over the peak.
CELLULAR CONVECTION — An organized, convecUve.
fluid motion characterized by the presence of distinct
convection cells or convectlve units, usually with up-
ward motion (away from the heat source) in the cen-
tral portions of the cell, and sinking or downward flow
in the cell's outer regions.
CHAFF— Metallic, electrical dipoles, several centime-
ters long, commonly made of fine wire.
The original use of chaff, dropping large quantities
of It from aircraft in WWII, was to jam enemy radars
It is now used experimentally to alter the electrical
properties of thunderstorms.
CHAFF SEEDING -The dispensing of chaff into a cu-
mulonimbus cloud for the experimental purpose of
altering the cloud's electrical structure and hence
affecting the occurrence and character of lightning.
It is hypothesized that the chaff is the medium for
leakage currents (through corona point discharges)
which forestall the development of the charge centers
necessary for lightning tormatioa
CIRRUS — A principal cirriform cloud type, composed of
ice crystals aggregated into delicate wisps or patches
at high altitudes.
The term "cirrus" is often used as a generic term
for ail cirriform clouds.
CLOUD — A visible aggregate of minute water and/or
ice particles in the atmosphere above the earth's
surface. Cloud differs from fog only In that the latter
is, by definition, in contact with the earth's surface.
Clouds form in the free atmosphere as a result
of condensation of water vapor In rising currents of
air, or by the evaporation of the lowest stratum of
fog. For condensation to occ\ir at the point of satura-
tion or a low degree of supersatu ration, there must
be an abundance of condensation nuclei for water
clouds, or ice nuclei for ice-crystal clouds. The size of
cloud drops varies from one cloud type to another,
and within any given cloud there always exists a fin-
ite range of sizes. Generally speaking, cloud drops
range between one and one hundred microns in di-
ameter, and hence are very much smaller than rain
drops.
CLOUD MICROPHYSICS-A specialized field within
cloud physics dealing with extremely small-scale phe-
nomena, particularly the molecular-scale processes of
evaporation, condensation, and freezing of cloud par-
ticles, and the complex Interactions, Including elec-
trical effects, among cloud particles.
CLOUD MODEL — In general, any idealized represents
tkon of a cloud or cloud processes. Increasingly, this
term is used for mathematical representations of cloud
processes, particularly those formulated for numerical
solution on electronic computers
CLOUD MODIFICATION -Any process by which the
natural course of development of a cloud is altered by
artificial means.
CLOUD PHYSICS -The body of knowledge concerned
with physical properties of clouds in the atmosphere
and the processes occurring therein
CLOUD SEEDING — Any process of injecting a sub-
stance into a cloud for the purpose of influencing the
1 From Project Skywater ; 1973-74 Biennial Report. U.S. Department of the Interior.
Hur»-nu of Reclamation. Division of Atmospheric Water Resources Management. REC-ERC-
70-21. Denver, December 1976. pp. A-21 to A-25.
(742)
743
cloud's subsequent development. Ordinarily, this re-
fers to the injection of a nucleating agent, but some-
times alludes to substances which do not directly
affect nudeation (such as carbon black).
CLOUD SEEDING AGENT- Any variety of substances
dispensed for the purposes of cloud seeding. In addi-
tion to the commonly used silver Iodide and dry ice,
a number of other materials have been experimented
with for various purposes, for example: calcium chlor-
ide, urea, metaldehyde, chlorosulfonlc acid, carbon
black, common salt, and water spray.
COALESCENCE — In cloud physics, the merging of two
water drops into a single larger drop.
COALESCENCE EFFICIENCY -The fraction of all col
lis ions between water drops of a specified size which
result in actual merging of the two drops into a single
larger drop.
CONDENSATION — The physical process by which a
vapor becomes a liquid or solid; the opposite of evap-
oration. In meteorological usage, this term is applied
only to the transformation from vapor to liquid; any
process in which a solid forms directly from Its vapor
is termed sublimation, as is the reverse process.
CONDENSATION LEVEL -That level in the atmos-
phere at which saturation and hence condensation,
will occur in a column of rising air. This occurs by
virtue of the adlabatic cooling of the air as it rises.
CONDENSATION NUCLEUS — A particle, either liquid
or solid, upon which condensation of water vapor be-
gins in the atmosphere. See nudeation.
CONTROL CLOUD— In doud seeding experiments on
Individual douds, a. doud chosen to remain unseeded,
but is otherwise monitored as if it had been, in order
to provide data for comparison with seeded douds.
CONVECTION— 1. In general, mass motions within a
fluid resulting in transport and mixing of the proper-
ties of that fluid.
2. As specialized in meteorology, atmospheric motions
that are predominantly vertical, resulting in vertical
transport and mixing of atmospheric properties.
CONVECTION CURRENT — (or convective current)
Any current of air involved in convection. In meteor-
ology, this Is usually applied to the upward moving
portion of a convection circulation, such as a thermal
or the updraft In cumulus douds.
CUMULI FORM - Llxe cumulus; generally descriptive of
all douds, the principal characteristic of which Is ver-
tical development In the form of rising mounds, domes,
or towers.
CUMULONIMBUS— ( Commonly called thundercloud,
thunderhead, thunderstorm.) A principal doud type,
the ultimate stage of development of cumulus or con-
vective douds. They are very dense and very talL
commonly 5 to 10 miles In diameter and sometimes
reaching a height of 12 miles or more. The upper
portion Is at least partly composed of ice crystals,
and often takes the form of an anvil ("Incus") or
vast plume The base of the doud Is Invariably dark
and often accompanied by low, ragged douds.
CUMULUS — A principal doud type, actually a doud
"family" all of which are characterized by vertical
development; a convective doud.
DEFTV88ION — In meteorology, the exchange of fluid
parcels (and hence the transport of conservative prop
erties between regions In space. In the apparently
random motions of a scale too small to be treated by
the equations of motion.
In meteorology, the diffusion of momentum (vis-
cosity), vortlclty, water vapor, heat (conduction),
particulate matter, and gaseous components of the
atmospheric mixture, have been studied extensively.
The atmospheric motions diffusing these properties
may in many cases be of much larger scale than the
molecular, the exchanging parcels being called eddies,
and the diffusion equation extended by analogy to
turbulent diffusion
DOPPLER EFFECT— (Also called Doppler shift) The
change In frequency with which energy reaches a
receiver when the receiver and the energy source are
in motion relative to each other.
DOPPLER RADAR— A radar which detects and inter
pre is the Doppler effect in terms of the radial velocity
of a target The signal received by a radar from a
moving target differs slightly In frequency from the
transmitted wave.
Doppler radar la widely used In doud studies
because it enables the deduction of the motions of
doud and precipitation partides.
DRY-ICE- Solid carbon dioxide (CO2). It evaporates
directly from solid to gas at a temperature of -78. 5* C
DRY-ICE SEEDING — The dispensing of dry-ice pellets
Into supercooled douds for the purpose of transform
Ing the supercooled droplets Into ice crystals, which
then grow and fall out Dry ice creates a sufficiently
cold environment around the droplet* for them to
undergo spontaneous nudeation
ECHO— In radar, a general term for the appearance,
on a radar Indicator, of the radio energy returned
from a target More explicitly, It refers to the energy
reflected or scattered back from a target
744
FREEZING NUCLEUS — Any particle which, when pre
sent within a mass of supercooled water, will Initiate
growth of an Ice crystal about itself (see nudeatlon).
GLACIATION— In cloud physics, the transformation of
cloud particles from water drops to ice crystals
GROUND GENERATOR— In weather modification, al
most invanabh referring to silver iodide smoke gen
erat/>rs that are operated on the ground (as opposed
to airborne equipment).
HAIL SUPPRESSION — Any method of reducing the
damaging effects of hailstorms by operating on the
hail producing cloud.
The currently prevailing hypothesis is that silver
iodide seeding provides more hailstone nuclei (and, at
the same time, reduces the amount of supercooled
water available to build up large hailstones) with the
net effect that the hail that reaches the ground Is
smaller and less damaging, and also has a higher
probability of melting before reaching the ground
HYGROSCOPIC NUCLEI — Condensation nuclei com
posed of salts which yield aqueous solution., of a very
low equilibrium vapor pressure compared with that of
pure water at the same temperature. Condensation
of hygroscopic nuclei may begin at a relative humidity
much lower than 100 percent (about 75 percent for
sodium chloride), while on so-called non- hygroscopic
nuclei, which merely furnish sufficiently large (by
molecular standards ) wettable surfaces, relative hu-
midities of nearly 100 percent are required. "Damp
haze" is formed of hygroscopic particles In the process
of slow growth in relatively dry air
HYGROSCOPIC SEEDING -Cloud seeding with hygro
scopic material which encourages condensation and
collect* water vapor
ICE CRYSTAL— Any one of a number of macroscopic
crystalline forms In which ice appears, Including hex
agonal columns, hexagonal platelet*, dendritic cry
stals, ice needles, and combinations of these forms
I IE CRYSTAL CLOUD- A cloud consisting entirely of
ice crystals (such as cirrus); to be distinguished in
this sense from water clouds and mixed clouds
ICE NUCLEUS - Any particle which serve* as a nucleus
in the formation of ice crystals In the atmosphere,
used without regard to the particular physical process
involved in the nucleation.
Due to an apparent scarcity of natural ice nuclei
(or. at least, freezing nuclei) in the atmosphere, cloud
-eeding with ice- nucleating agents become* a practi
cal endeavor Both sliver iodide and dry ice perform
the function of nucleating ice in an aggregate of su
percooled water droplet*
ICE- PHASE SEEDING -Cloud seeding with an agent
which serves as an artificial ice nucleus.
ISOHYET — A line drawn on a map connecting geo
graphical points having equal amounts of precipitation
during a given time period, or for a particular storm
LIQUID WATER CONTENT — ( Abbreviated LWC. (The
amount of liquid water (that is, not counting water
vapor) in a cloud, usually expressed as grams of
water per cubic meter of cloud volume.
MESO-SCALE— In meteorology: having characteristic
spatial dimensions somewhere between 1 and 100
miles, usually implying between 5 and 50 miles.
NUCLEATING AGENT — (or nucleant) In cloud phy-
sics, any substance that serves to accelerate the nu
cleation of cloud particles Nucleating agents may
themselves be nuclei (silver iodide, salt, sulfur di
oxide, dust ) or they may enhance the nucleation en-
vironment (dry, ice, propane spray ).
NUCLEATION — Any process by which the phase
change of a substance to a more condensed state
(condensation, sublimation, freezing) is initiated at
certain loci (see nucleus i within the less condensed
state.
A number of types of nucleation are of interest
The process by which condensation nuclei initiate the
phase change from vapor to liquid is of decisive im-
portance in analyses of all cloud formation problems.
The physical nature of freezing nuclei which may be
responsible for the conversion of drops of supercooled
water into ice crystals is critically important in pre-
cipitation theory, us is also the clarification of the role
of spontaneous nucleation near -40*C The impor
tance of sublimation nuclei is promoting the growth of
ice crystals directly from the vapor phase is doubtful
NUCLEUS — In physical meteorology, u purticle of any
nature upon which, or the locus at which, molecules
of water or ice accumulate as a result of a phase
change to a more condensed state; an agent of nu
cleation.
NUCLEUS COUNTER -Any of severul devices for de
termining the number of condensation nuclei or ice
nuclei in a sample of air.
NUMERICAL MODEL— In meteorology, a mathemati
cal formulation of atmospheric processes constructed
so that the dynamical and thcrmodynamical equations
of atmospheric motion can be solved by numerical
methods on electronic computers
OROGRAPHIC CLOUD- A cloud whose lorrn and c\
tent is determined by the disturbing effects ■>( imi
graph>. mountains, upon the passing flow of ,ur Me
745
cause these clouds are linked with the form of the
terrestrial relief, they generaJly move very slowly, If
at all, although the winds at the same level may be
very strong.
OROGRAPHIC LIFTING -The lifting of an air current
caused by its passage up and over mountains
OVERSEEDING — Cloud seeding in which an excess of
nucleating material is released. As the term is nor
mally used, the excess Is relative to that amount of
nucleating material which would, theoretically, maxi-
mize the precipitation received at the ground. In
seeding a supercooled cloud with dry ice or silver
iodide, addition of too much seeding material may
create so many ice crystals that none can grow to a
size large enough to fall out of the updraft sustaining
the cloud.
PLUME— The volume of air space containing any of the
substance emitted from a point source.
PRECIPITATION -Any or all of the forms of water
particles, whether liquid or solid, that fall from the
atmosphere and reach the ground
PRECIPITATION ECHO -A Type of radar echo re
turned by precipitation
PRECIPITATION EFFICIENCY — For a given cloud or
storm system, the ratio of the amount of precipitation
actually produced to the maximum amount theoreti-
cally possible by that system.
PRECIPITATION GAGE -General term for any device
that measures the amount of precipitation; princi-
pally, a rain gage or snow gage
PYROTECHNIC GENERATOR -A type of silver iodide
smoke generator in which th^silver iodide forms as
a part of the pyrotechnic fuel mbtture. A great flexi
bility of design is possible with these generators, and
they are capable of an extremely high output of
silver- iodide nuclei.
RADIOSONDE- A balloon borne instrument for the
simultaneous measurement and transmission of mete-
orological data.
RAIN MAKING -Popular and general term for all
weather modification effort aimed at increasing pre-
cipitation.
RANDOM — Eluding precise prediction, completely Ir-
regular. In connection with probability and statistics,
the term random Implies collective or long-run regu-
larity; thus a long record of the behavior of a random
phenomenon presumably gives a fair indication of Its
general behavior in another long record, although the
individual observations have no discernible system of
progression
RANDOMIZE — To make random. Specifically, in weath
er modification contexts, It refers to the design of
experiments and projects In such a way as to mini
mlze the sources of bias in the evaluation of results
by dictating that "seed" or "don't seed" decisions
(for example) be made on a purely random basis
If the total number of such decisions Is sufficient, ■,
large, this procedure ensures that a comparison of
"seed" versus "don't seed" results contains minimal
bias.
REAL-TIME — Nearly Instantaneous.
SALT NUCLEUS — A minute salt particle serving as a
condensation nucleus.
SALT SEEDING — Cloud seeding with salt particles, a
technique that has been applied to warm (non-super
cooled) clouds and fog on the principle that the hy
groscopic droplets of salt solution will grow at the
expense of other particles.
SEEDING RATE — The quantity of seeding agent (in
grams or kilograms) released either per unit of time
(if applied to ground-based generators) or per unit
of distance (traveled by an aircraft) used in cloud
seeding.
SILVER IODIDE — (Chemical formula: Agl. ) The com
pound of silver and iodine whose crystalline structure
very closely approximates that of Ice-crystals.
SILVER-IODIDE GENERATOR- Any of several de
vices used to generate a smoke of silver-iodide cry
staJs Most burn an acetone solution of silver iodide;
the other Important (and newer) category is that
of pyrotechnic generators.
SILVER-IODIDE SEEDING — The world-wide "work-
horse" method of cloud seeding, where, by any of
several techniques, silver- Iodide crystals are intro
duced into the supercooled portions of clouds to induce
the nucleation of Ice crystals.
SNOW COURSE -An established line, usually from
several hundred feet to as much as a mile long,
traversing representative terrain in a mountainous
region of appreciable snow accumulation Along this
course instruments (such as snow stakes, radioactive
snow gages) are installed, and/or core samples of the
snow cover are periodically taken and averaged to
obtain a measure of Its water equivalent
STRATOCUMULUS-A principal, low-altitude, cloud
type, consisting of a layer of rounded or roll shaped
elements which may or may not be merged and which
usually are arranged in orderly flies or a wave pat
tern.
SUBLIMATION — The transition of a substance from
the solid phase directly to the vapor phase, or vice
746
versa, without puitng through an intermediate liquid
phase.
SUPERCOOLING — The reduction of temperature of any
liquid below the melting point of that substance's
eolld phase; that Is, cooling beyond its nominal freez-
ing point A liquid may be supercooled to varying
degrees, depending upon the relative lack of freezing
nuclei or solid boundary irregularities within its en-
vironment, and freedom from agitation.
SYNOPTIC— In general, pertaining to or affording an
overall view.
In meteorology, this term has become somewhat
specialized in referring to the use of meteorological
data obtained simultaneously over a aide area for the
purpose of presenting a comprehensive and nearly
Instantaneous picture of the state of the atmosphere.
Thus, to a meteorologist, "synoptic." takes on the
additional connotation of simultaneity.
TARGET AREA — la a weather modification project,
the area within which the effects of the weather mod-
ification effort are expected to be found
TRACER— An easily detectable substance injected into
the atmosphere for the purpose of subsequent mea-
surement and reconstruction of Its history- (trajectory,
diffusion, etc )
TRAJECTORY— (Or path, t A curve in space tracing
the points successively occupied by a particle in mo-
tion. At any given Instant the velocity vector of the
particle Is tangent to the trajectory.
WARM CLOUD— In weather modification terminology,
a water doud that is not a supercooled cloud La,
that exists entirely at temperatures above 0*C.
WATER EQUIVALENT— The depth of water that would
result from the melting of the snowpack or of a snow
sample.
WATER VAPOR— (Also called aqueous vapor, mois
tore.) Water substance In vapor form: one of the
most Important of all constituents of the atmosphere.
WEATHER MODIFICATION — The Intentional or In-
advertent alteration of weather by human agency.
WEATHER RADAR -Generally, any radar which Is
suitable or can be used for the detection of precipi-
tation or clouds.
o
3 1262 09118 6238
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American Libraries
TV News
Understanding 9/11